EATC, I have completed my project of making an article about every PA State Senator from 2000-now. Now, I am starting the larger project of creating an article for every PA House member serving from 2000-now.

I have all missing members listed at User:A. Gorilla/sandbox, along with an archived copy of their PA House profile. This profile provides all the information that is needed to get these articles up to decent stub quality and will keep them from being deleted. This is a large and probably tedious project, but a useful one. Once we get these up to stub status, others will come by and expand them into fuller articles --in time.

So, I would like to invite you to help me with this project. I have a template at User:A. Gorilla/sandbox1, and you can just copy and paste it for each new article. Feel free to edit as you wish at either of these pages to help note the progress. Also, please let me know if you are familiar with anyone else who might be inclined to help out. --A. Gorilla (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As far as I can tell, we now have a page for every State Rep and State Senator who served from 2000-now. Thanks for the help! Of course, lots of these articles are just a name, an infobox, and an external link, so they need some work, but at least the articles are up! Now, I would like to get pages for the 50 or missing state rep districts. --A. Gorilla (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good work in having a page for all those state representatives and state senators. Now for improvements. For example, Jim Lynch (Pennsylvania politician) has four inline citations. When should an article like this be rated class=start rather than class=stub, and consequently have the stub template removed from the article? This is a question for the general case, since there are many hundreds of articles on PA state representatives and PA state senators.--DThomsen8 (talk) 16:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Thanks! The debate over rating (start versus stub), for me, is one that centers around references. I think an article like that, with some text and citations would be a stub. Articles that Blargh has created, where it's just the infobox essentially, would be a start class article, IMO. In terms of removing the stub template, I generally eyeball the amount, quality and deliniation of text on the page. If there is enough text that it has been broken into sections (of reasonable length) and the prose of the article extends past the infobox, I remove stub designation. My way is subjective, I know, but I think such subjectivity is almost necessary with such a matter.

I think my subjective judgment is the opposite of what you are saying, but maybe not. I rate all articles without at least three inline citations as stub, and only upgrade them to start, or maybe, if fairly long and detailed with five or more inline citations, preferably secondary sources not directly dependent on the subject of the article, class=C. Having a stub template in the article is different from class=stub on the talk page, because it calls attention to the article by a more visible category than the template.

I also run AWB on articles, and that service sometimes removes the article space stub, or provides a message that a long article might not be a stub. --DThomsen8 (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw this edit, and I think it is best to leave the links the way they were. Generally, the external links should reflect the title of the webpage to which they point, which is why the official senate profiles are titled like this:"Pennsylvania State Senate - Robert J. Thompson (R)" and the official caucus webpages are titled like this:"Pennsylvania Senate Republican Caucus - Robert J. Thompson." When you strip out the PA State Senate/PA Senate Caucus descriptors, it makes the links less useful and more likely to be deleted by a careless editor later on. Cool.--A. Gorilla (talk) 01:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In case you didn't know this, when a state rep or senator retires/loses/doesn't run for re-election, their terms expire on November 30th of that year. Here you have Chadwick's term going until the year after his retirement. That would make sense, since the inauguration for the successors are in January of the next year, but technically, they are done (and stop getting paid) that previous November 30.--A. Gorilla (talk) 04:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You say that the current labels are "plenty easy to read." Would you not welcome an improvement? Is that not allowed? Why don't you change all the Pennsylvania ones to the short, clean label I have been using? Improvements are not allowed if they break with an awkward form in every other member of congress' article in the encyclopedia? Nothing can ever improve? Needed consistancy trumps obviously quality? Besides you've got most of them all wrong. Look closely. Please restore the label I was using and spend six months giving some thought as to which is superior. Why do we spend so much time on trivial labeling issues and so little on actual content? stilltim (talk) 19:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Where did you find January 2 as the beginning and end dates for these two former County Commissioners? If we don't know the exact dates, we should just keep the year: it's better to be overly general and correct rather than too specific and possibly wrong.[1] and [2]--Blargh29 (talk) 00:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought that you might be interested in this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania/Politics and Government. It's a coordination location for people who write about Pennsylvania politics and government.--Blargh29 (talk) 03:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you have a cite for this date? When a date is more specific than just the year, we really need to cite that. (Like at Frank LaGrotta._ Otherwise, someone will just change them around later. The House Journals are great sources for that. Most PDFs there are text searchable, which makes it easy, just CRTL + F and search for the legislator's last name. However, it is not necessary to cite November 30 as a legislator's last day in office if his term is simply expiring, as opposed to ending for death/resignation/election elsewhere.--Blargh29 (talk) 05:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After some research, I believe that unlike the State House, the Pennsylvania State Senate was organized into numbered districts since the constitution of 1854. So, the articles in Category:Pennsylvania Senate Districts need to be updated to reflect this reality. At some point in the future, I guess we ought to backfill those senate district pages back to 1854.--Blargh29 (talk) 03:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Great. We'll get this sorted out eventually.--Blargh29 (talk) 04:17, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• I'm in the process of creating stubs for all PA Senators dating back to 1969.--Blargh29 (talk) 02:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are under discussion here. Cardamon (talk) 06:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just so you know, some troll thinks you're my sockpuppet. He even filed a report, which I tried to speedy delete. --William S. Saturn (talk) 07:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I notice that quite a few of your references are pretty much bare URLs with a page title. I would like to suggest that you consider using Wikipedia:Citation templates for your references. I have written an essay listing the benefits of citation templates: User:Blargh29/Using citation templates. Cheers! --Blargh29 (talk) 05:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• By the way, I am going through the PA House members and adding predecessor/successor values, as well as any adding any relevant WP:HATNOTEs. I'm starting with 203 and working down. Next, I will go through the Senators and add any PA House tenure to their infoboxes. I see you often edit for floor leaders and whips. There is a good list of people who have held these offices in the PA Manual. What do you think about making a page for party leaders in the House and Senate? Maybe something like Party leaders of the United States House of Representatives? Anyways, keep up the good work.--Blargh29 (talk) 05:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Check out The Public Record (newspaper) and follow the website link to the online newspaper. Jimmy Tayoun and his associates may lean towards the D's, but there is a lot of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania news there, especially in the columns. --DThomsen8 (talk) 20:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Thanks for the heads up, will do.

I don't know if you ever used these before, but the House Journal and Senate Journal are really great resources to locate dates for inaugurations and resignations for House/Senate bios.This page has some good example citation templates, too.--Blargh29 (talk) 01:33, 1 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• By the way, I have been seeing some errors in the "term_start" and "term_end" parameters. Sometimes there are some dates that confuse when an official is elected versus when they are sworn in, (like at William Quest). Other times, the dates are incorrect because they are too specific. If we don't have a source saying that someone took office in 2001, we shouldn't assume that it was January 2, 2001. If we are going to be really precise with our dates, then we need to get good sources on that. If the Wilkes University Election Statistics Project says their term started in 2001, let's leave it at that. That sound reasonable?--Blargh29 (talk) 07:08, 1 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is perfect. Thanks! That really helps. --Blargh29 (talk) 08:03, 3 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't mean to be rude, but we really can't be adding dates that are more specific than our sources indicate. For James Gallen [here, you added an inauguration date, where the source at Wilkes University simply gives the year of 1965. In order to be so specific, we need a more specific source, like the House Journal or the Pennsylvania Manual. This is important because those dates could be wrong, since these legislators might have been elected in special elections. Also, I have seen some instances where you have added incorrect dates for inauguration, usually by using the election day.--Blargh29 (talk) 02:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Thanks for your note. For now, let's rely on the House or Senate journals for inauguration dates. Those are going to be the most complete and accurate statements for inauguration dates. If you look at the first day of each session, there is usually a list of new members who are inaugurated. Is that a good place to start?

• Also, I would really hesitate to rely too much on the Wilkes resource, since there are a lot of tyops and errors the further you go back in time. (see User:Blargh29/Wilkes for my collection of its errors). --Blargh29 (talk) 00:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you be interested in working on external links for house and senate members? The external link section at Larry Farnese is a fairly good example of good external link coverage.--Blargh29 (talk) 17:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Maybe I haven't been clear about explaining my thoughts on the dates/years situation. Let's say there's a fellow for whom the Wilkes Project tells us served from 1991-92. There isn't any more information about what particular date he was sworn-in or elected. So, in that infoboxs, we should limit ourselves to saying that he served from 1991 to 1992. Without more information, we can't go and say for sure January 1, 1991 to November 30, 1992. That is being too specific, and is actually WP:Original Research on our part. Does that make sense? --Blargh29 (talk) 08:40, 10 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please take a look at Aristotle, Inc., a new article I created, which is relevant to Pennsylvania politics because of the John Perzel connection.

An article with this title was deleted in the past as not notable, but with additional material I think it is notable, or can be rescued should it be challenged. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Took a look, and I definately think it's worth keeping. Hats off on the find. I'd come to bat to save it if it came to that. Clearly more work needed, but certainly meets notability, IMO.

Here are more references and a quote for future use.

Aristotle releases dead and moved voter numbers on Massachusetts.

• • http://www.sfexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Massachusetts-has-estimated-116K-dead-voters-on-its-rolls-81977052.html

• • http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzM3NzhmZTNlZWUyNjBlMWRlMDNlZTM4NWU3MWU1N2I=

Info on Aristotle board member towards the bottom of this reference:

• • http://blog.taragana.com/business/2010/02/04/senate-panel-oks-union-lawyer-for-labor-board-but-nominee-could-face-larger-hurdle-on-floor-28081/

Press release about News Corp:

• • http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/aristotle-calls-for-newscorp-to-sell-myspace-and-disclose-any-liability-risk-from-contacts-sex-offenders-may-have-had-with-children-using-the-social-networking-service-83272642.html

Quote from the press release: “Aristotle also is recognized as a global pioneer in political technology, providing indispensable tools to those who seek to use the Democratic process to influence decisions at the ballot box. Every occupant of the White House -- Democrat and Republican -- for more than 25 years has been an Aristotle customer, as are many U.S. Senators, members of the U.S. House of Representatives, and Democratic and Republican state party organizations. For information about career opportunities or for client inquiries, go to www.aristotle.com.” All that directly from their website. --DThomsen8 (talk) 17:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eugene Saloom has no references, and has an orphan tag. I added information about his former business, but the citation creating tool is not working this morning for me. There should be a citation for his PA house service, though. Can you help?--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a question as to Eugene Saloom's party affiliation. I tried to include some other citations--most notably from his time in the PA House.98.206.138.33 (talk) 01:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've been trying to create some fairly detailed articles about PA gubernatorial elections. However, it's sometimes really hard to find out who was the losing candidate in the lieutenant governor's race. I see that you've added boxes to the pages of some figures that show that they were the nominee to this office and lists the candidates who preceeded/followed them. Could you tell me where you found this information? Right now, I'm at a loss for finding the 1914, 1926, and 1938 Democratic nominee.Mr. Vitale (talk) 06:53, 27 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the help. I've found some information that will definitely be useful in future gubernatorial articles. However, I still haven't been able to find the 1926 Democratic nominee for Lieutenant Govenor. If you could help me out, that would be great. I'll bet set to chronicale the governor's races back to the beginning of the 20th Century. Mr. Vitale (talk) 21:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Messaging you must have been good luck. I tried one last search and figured it out. Mr. Vitale (talk) 21:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, EATC! 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) 04:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to the project and please let me know if you have any comments, questions or suggestions. --Kumioko (talk) 22:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

With the first of what I hope will be monthly newsletters I again want to welcome you to the project and hope that as we all work together through the year we can expand the project, create missing articles and generally improve the pedia thought mutual cooperation and support. Now that we have a project and a solid pool of willing members I wanted to strike while the iron is hot and solicite help in doing a few things that I believe is a good next step in solidifiing the project. I have outlined a few suggestions where you can help with on the projects talk page. This includes but is not limited too updating Portal:United States, assessing the remaining US related articles that haven't been assessed, eliminating the Unrefernced BLP's and others. If you have other suggestions or are interested in doing other things feel free. I just wanted to offer a few suggestions were additional help is needed. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, comments or suggestions or you can always post something on the projects talk page. If you do not want to recieve a monthly message please put an * before your name on the members page.--Kumioko (talk) 02:56, 12 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, wasn't that nice of them? I blocked the IP for 31 hours. It's a long term vandal who's been attacking the Craig MacTavish article over a period of time. I guess they felt the need to move onto a different form of vandalism. I'll keep an eye out for that behaviour too. Cheers! Resolute 01:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Starting with the February 2011 issue WikiProject United States has established a newsletter to inform anyone interested in United States related topics of the latest changes. This newsletter will not only discuss issues relating to WikiProject United States but also:

1. Portal:United States
2. the United States Wikipedians Noticeboard
3. the United States Wikipedians collaboration of the Month - The collaboration article for February is Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
4. and changes to Wikipolicy, events and other things that may be of interest to you.

You may read or assist in writing the newsletter, subscribe, unsubscribe or change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you by following this link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page or the Newsletters talk page. --Kumioko (talk) 20:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear EATC

I'm trying to update RVF's page. I'm seeing that you keep changing it back.

We can revise content to be less campaign oriented. But the current content does need to be updated. It is all pre-DA data. Nothing about her accomplishments while in office.

Can you contact me so we can work this out?

Thanks,

Tim Deegan11 (talk) 16:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks EATC for getting back to me.

I am a friend and colleague of Risa Ferman's and she is aware that I am attempting to update her wiki entry. We are simply trying to get the information current in a concise format. Would you mind sharing with me your name so I know whom I am working with?

The content we'd like to add is attached below. This has been edited to be less campaign oriented. All of it is drawn from her bio on the DA's office website and her personal C.V. This exists in an altered, more promotional form on her campaign website (which I wrote). All of which are already listed as cited sources on the current wiki page. Take a look and let me know how we can work together. I appreciate your assistance.

Mark:

Thanks for your assistance. I've cited the various references as best as I could. Most are cited to the Montgomery County website and are a matter of public record. Hopefully this will be enough. PLease let em know and then we can get the wiki page officially updated.

Much obliged.

Tim Deegan11 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Thanks for your help.

Have a great evening.

Regards,

Tim Deegan11 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:18, 11 April 2011 (UTC).Reply[reply]

The April 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) 19:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The May 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) 02:09, 6 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The June 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) 18:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

United States National Archives WikiProject

Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts. There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The July 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) 00:37, 24 July 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) 15:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear EATC,

The controversy regarding Babette Josephs and Gregg Kravitz is well-known and well-documented. Wikipedia is a place to document historical facts - it is NOT to be used as a campaign website, to promote one individual's agenda over another, nor to provide revisionist history. I will report you to Wikipedia if you continue to erase documentation from www.GreggKravitz.com which clearly provides for a more even-handed description of the controversy.

Regards,

HonestleadershipPA (talk) 16:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC) HonestLeadershipPAReply[reply]

Please note that I've made a slight correction for the starting and ending dates of Tener's Congressional term, which I thought I'd let you know about as it may affect other articles you might work on. Until the Twentieth Amendment was adopted, the terms began and ended on March 4th, rather than on January 3rd. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi "EATC"

When looking up an article a few moments ago I saw a message appear on the page - it was rather rude and I really have no idea what it was referencing...

I looked at the history of edits and saw what you reverted, but if those edits were made, they were not made by me - perhaps another member of my household? I can ask around, but you might wish to look up an article on manners before writing a message to anyone at a particular IP address.

Best, Yaakov 65.96.174.189 (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The December 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) 01:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The January 2012 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.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:57, 16 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Marcy Toepel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Douglass Township, Pennsylvania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited David Oh (politician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rutgers University School of Law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

After just checking the article, there are still a number of inaccuracies/imbalances that perhaps together we can correct ...

I am researching the sources and I will be back to you.

Thank you,

(Thenewphilly (talk) 19:33, 14 February 2012 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Hi EATC :-) I wanted to let you know that I added back a paragraph that you removed from the Bob Casey, Jr. article. When you removed it, you didn't leave an edit summary explaining your reasoning. In the future it would be helpful to leave an edit summary for other editors to understand your intentions, especially when removing content. If you think the content could be improved, it can be discussed on the talk page. Thanks and happy editing!

HI EATC,

I removed the edits you made to Rob Gleason's page on Jan 17, Jan 15 and reverted to the correct version on Jan 17. The biographical information contained in Mr. Gleason's post that you had edited was incorrect. Please refrain from making additional changes that damage the integrity of the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.163.146.217 (talk) 17:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi EATC,

My apologies for the delayed response ...

I have the suggested edits for this section.

I believe I go to the "Sandbox" to paste them. I will look at that and hopefully it will work.

Thanks.

Thenewphilly (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi EATC,

I made these edits in "mysandbox" but I didn't know how to give you access, so I am pasting them here ... please let me know the proper method and I will adhere to it in the future.

Regards,

Thenewphilly (talk) 03:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Military Controversy

During the 2011 campaign, The Philadelphia Daily News reported that, despite Oh’s eight-year-old claims to have served as an Officer in the U.S. Army Special Forces (commonly known as Green Berets), two of his commanding officers felt the assertion represented a stretching of the truth. Oh criticized the paper for publishing the sensationalized piece as a cover story which stated that Oh did not serve in the Special Forces and used a photo-shopped picture of Oh. The City Paper then published articles quoting another of Oh’s commanding officers defending his claims and casting doubt on the original article in the Daily News. The original accusations were to some considered a smear campaign perpetrated by political opponents and operatives. Oh received endorsements from decorated Vietnam Veteran and Former Secretary of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, and the United Veteran’s Council of Philadelphia, representing 22 veterans organizations.[11][12][13] Oh asserted that the story was based on a misunderstanding over military terminology. He noted that he did indeed commissioned a Second Lieutenant and served in the 20th Special Forces Group with the Maryland National Guard. At the time, all soldiers in a Special Forces unit wore the Green Beret. He however did not complete Special Forces training, which he asserted was what led to the misunderstanding. Oh had openly stated that he was not Special Forces qualified. "I didn’t claim to be a Q-Force qualified A Team Green Beret,”[6] said Oh, but he did later apologize for any confusion that may have been caused by not making clarifying statements when others referred to him as a Green Beret, which he characterized as an "honest mistake".[7][8][9]

11. City Paper Department of Collections http://www.citypaper.net/blogs/nakedcity/The-Taking-Down-of-David-Oh.htmlmedia-moments-2011.html 12. http://www.citypaper.net/blogs/nakedcity/Man-who-recruited-David-Oh-to-serve-defends-candidates-record-.html 13. http://davidoh.com/Inquirer_Ad_11-4-11.pdf

Hi EATC,

Just checking in ... curious about your thoughts on the edits.

Regards,

Thenewphilly (talk) 16:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,

Just checking in ...

Thenewphilly (talk) 21:25, 27 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear EATC,

I have not heard back from you ...

I think it would be fair to just make the changes proposed if I don't hear back from you by close of business this week.

Regards,

Thenewphilly (talk) 02:43, 2 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi EATC,

Thank you for the last edits ...

I think they are fair for now and I will only suggest changes as I encounter new or better documentation.

Regards,

Thenewphilly (talk) 02:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to the Gifford Pinchot article! Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 23:00, 8 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Mary A. McLaughlin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rutgers University School of Law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 03:45, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edmund V. Ludwig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Court of Common Pleas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:08, 1 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Giannini, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big 5 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi EATC! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 14:44, 28 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

	US Banknote Contest
	November-December 2019
There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons. In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate. If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here

Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)Reply[reply]