This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Talk page archives Current talk Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 Archive 25 • Archive 26 • Archive 27 Archive 28 • Archive 29 • Archive 30 Archive 31 • Archive 32 • Archive 33 Archive 34 • Archive 35 • Archive 36 Archive 37 • Archive 38 • Archive 39 Archive 40 • Archive 41 • Archive 42 Archive 43 • Archive 44 • Archive 45 Archive 46 • Archive 47 • Archive 48 Archive 49 • Archive 50 • Archive 51 Archive 52 • Archive 53 • Archive 54 Archive 55 • Archive 56 • Archive 57 (template link) (revert point)

I undid the Centerville change on the Greene County template. Centerville recently annexed into Sugarcreek Twp in Greene County (http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=116DBDB2D16DF5B8&p_docnum=7). I'm also updating the Miami County template to represent Clayton as city. Clayton recently annexed into Miami County; this is shown on the new 2007 Transportation Map (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/map1/ohiomap). Good idea on separating the cities and village, btw.

Prinzwilhelm

Thanks for adding county navigation templates to various Ohio County articles. I have two questions for you - what do think of using the state county locator map instead of the Ohio flag in the top left corner? Also, what about dividing cities and villages? (See ((Hancock County, Ohio)) or any Pennsylvania county for examples, although PA has cities and boroughs.) Keep up the good work and thanks again! Ruhrfisch 04:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry to be slow in replying. I would try to use free images in the boxes, because fair use images may be removed (they are best used in as few places as possible and a county nav box will be on a dozen or more pages). Flags or seals are often not free and as you point out are hard to come by - every county has a locator map (though svg format is better if available). I admit that I am partial to the maps as they give location info within the state and are all the same size (one reason I switched over all the PA county nav boxes to maps). However, as long as all the nav boxes are consistent, I think it is fine whatever is done (same argument applies to the cities and villages being split or not). One place to raise these questions would be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ohio. That way there would be consensus. If you do raise the question, I would also ask about the Township only nav boxes on some counties. Bottom line - my preference is svg maps in the corners and split lines for cities and villages, but I would still ask at the WikiProject Ohio to see what the consensus is. Hope this sort of answers your question, Ruhrfisch 05:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

At first I wondered why Category:Ohio geography stubs had more than doubled in size in a week... then I came across your contribution history! There's now so many that they'll need to be split into smaller stub types (presumably by county, or larger region like MAs). So I'm wondering if you can tell me... How many further articles are you planning on adding, in total? Do you have numbers on how they break down by county? And, if you're going to be working on these further, would you be willing to re-tag some of them youself? Thanks. Alai 10:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, and the information. An Ohio-township-stub would be a possibility, though it looks like it'd leave a lot of others behind (I assume mainly municipality). By the sounds of it, not many (or any) individual counties will be viable for their own stub type, but if we create a stub template per county, it leaves open the option of grouping several counties into a category for each MA, or other region -- assuming those have some official or generally accepted standing, at least enough to be relatively useful and not overly contentious. I notice that Extreme Northwest Ohio is handily defined in terms of a neat list of counties, for example; if that and similarly-sized regions would be sensible, I'll propose those over at WP:WSS/P. Retagging should indeed by doable by 'bot; if the worst comes to the worst, I can wait until the next db dump and use the data from that, but it's probably also more or less OK to just do it by a sweep through each of the "live" county categories. (Worst thing that's likely to happen is the occasional error on articles categorised by more than one county, but I should be able to avoid that too if I'm careful.) Alai 23:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Basically I mean templates like ((Ashtabula-geo-stub)), ((BrownOH-geo-stub)), etc, populating categories such as Category:Greater Cleveland geography stubs and Category:Cincinnati geography stubs (or explicitly including the CSA names if they would be better). What are the next few (say, 6-10) you're planning on working on? Alai 15:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, completely. Feel free to do so for any that come to hand. I had vague plans of doing so for all the remaining counties, but as it wasn't quite clear what to do with them category-wise, my efforts slightly stalled. Alai 15:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thought: gazing at this map, it occurs to me that there's a block of metro- and micropolitan SAs in the east of the state, including only two "balance" counties; south of that, only five counties are metros or micros, and all the rest are balance. I wonder if it would make sense to have Category:Eastern Ohio geography stubs, containing Muskingum-Wheeling-Trumbull-Ashland; and Category:Southern Ohio geography stubs, containing everything south of those, and Columbus CSA, and east of the Cincinnati CSA. Or is that just shameless OR on my part? Alai 12:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Trouble is that it's only very loosely based on a USCB map: they have no such line between "eastern" and "southern", other than the one vaguely implied by the transition between (different) statistical areas. I'm not sure if I'm uncomfortable doing it the river/others way you suggested earlier, as just looking for stronger justification one way or another. I notice that the Ohio state gov. seems to use "Appalachian" to include the river counties, but does sub-divide those into three sub-regions: East Central, South East, and Southern [1]. Those also overlap with several CSAs, mind you, but we could ignore that small detail. Alai 15:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, I think I'll go ahead and use those, then. I've not the least problem with your "flexibility" on this: it's just useful to a a sanity check from someone who's at least somewhat well-informed (and it makes a mostly-pleasant change from those cases where people have too many opinions, with too little room for variance, which seems to happen on the least obvious of cases). Alai 16:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, working on this now. Why, though, did you 'move' Clinton County? It's not in Appalachian Ohio, and it is in the Cincinnati (et al) CSA (being the Wilmnington Micropolitan SA). Alai 20:19, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

You're right, I wrote that one in terms of the MSA, rather than the CSA, before going on to use the CSAs for the other two. I think the CSA definition would be preferable, so if you don't mind editing the map, yet again, then please... Alai 21:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Either, really. It's generally not worth the multi-stubbing if the number gets unduly large, thtough (either as a proportion, or in absolute terms). Alai 22:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that'd be perfectly OK. Alai 00:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

By 15 3/2 I am saying I am 16 1/2. I just have a very early age crisis and can't quite believe I'm a sophemore in high school already! Thanks for your recent trip going around Logan County taking pictures, it really helps make the area seem more important (air quotes). Makes me wish I actually did something with my account... SuperWikiman 12:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Please don't do this. It's not actually necessary — were I to move the page there I'd need to delete the whole page, which is different from blanking. I appreciate the thought, though :) Thanks, Kyle Barbour 20:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Nothing, I was just being a moron :( I've moved the page now. I thought I'd seen something wrong and hadn't, actually :) My mistake, sorry. Kyle Barbour 20:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, as for New Russia Township, Lorain County, Ohio: perfectly fine new name for it, and I've done the move, but please please please don't cut and paste moves. It messes up our GFDL compliance (see Wikipedia:Copyrights) and screws with things in general. It's not a huge deal, and it's all taken care of, but you may want to take a gander at WP:MOVE. Thanks! Kyle Barbour 20:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see, I was unaware that you hadn't known that an article already existed, my pardon. Since they looked similar I assumed. Sorry, mea culpa. Kyle Barbour 21:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Bravo townships!! You are like a machine!! We'll have 1,700,000 soon! Keep it upErnst Stavro Blofeld

Love all the work you have been doing on WP:OHTWP! Kudos to you, sir! --Kralizec! (talk) 02:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't close the articles, actually, because I am not an administrator. But I am considering taking this problem to the administrator's noticeboard. I'll let you know when I write up an explanation of the problem. Natalie 17:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I've just found out that the two editors that were revert warring have both been blocked for 48 hours, so the articles will be stable until at least then. Natalie 17:41, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Understandable. I had reported them both, so I figured to warn them, but an admin did the actual blocking. Natalie 18:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Nyttend. I attend Springs Reformed Church in Colorado Springs. I'm actually not a member of the church, but I have been attending for about seven months. What are you studying at Geneva?—Emote _{Talk Page} 21:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I do recall the Covenant Heights Conference in July. (Our church auditorium was rather empty on that particular Sunday.) I hope you enjoyed your visit to our beautiful state. If you ever come back, we should get together … we can sit down to a game of chess and chat about history. I see that you're an advocate of "book digitization." My dad started an electronic publishing company[2] about ten years ago, so I'm pretty heavily involved in that also. What do you plan to do with your history degree? Do you hope to teach someday?—Emote _{Talk Page} 23:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you added a picture showing the trees between Dodge City and Garden City. You should be aware that even though the riverbed there is now dry, many of the trees in the area in the Dodge City area along the riverbank for a stretch of several miles were actually killed roughly 15 years by a farmer who sprayed them with herbicide from a cropduster and was I believe subsequently convicted of a crime for having done so. I don't have any link proof for this at the moment, but I've heard this from area residents. --nonbonumest

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Awarded to User:Nyttend for your dilligent work making and adding templates to Ohio County articles and for your work with Ohio Townships. Ruhrfisch 20:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, the misspelled article has now been moved to Mwingi District. The target page (which was only a redirect to Mwingi) was speedily deleted on my request. thereafter, I was able to complete the move. Thus your requested move is no more valid. Anyway, much thanks for your recent contributions on Kenyan towns and district.Julius Sahara 20:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Nathaniel, if you have free time check out here, my first article in about a year and a half! Thanks for the thought. Sorry, I didn't sign, the past couple days my mom restricted my internet use and I've been very busy with band/choir contests and the school musical, which I have a main part in! By the way, if there are any favors you want done edit-wise don't hesitate to ask. SuperWikiman 21:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I have added a "((prod))" template to the article Gambia at the Olympics, 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. Addhoc 11:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Hermitage Township, Pennsylvania, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add ((hangon)) on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Ruhrfisch 04:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• I am glad that cleared things up and hope the links at the talk page are useful too. Please ask if there are more questions. Thanks again for catching my map error - it had been up almost a year and no one else noticed. Ruhrfisch 11:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Calvinism The goal of WikiProject Calvinism is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Calvinism available on Wikipedia. WP:WikiProject Calvinism as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Calvinism, but prefers that all Calvinist traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

—Emote _{Talk Page} 18:48, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

From: TimNelson 12:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

We'd actually love to have you at WikiProject Calvinism on the basis you suggested, of consolidation. Of course, if it's really your code way of saying "I'm not interested/don't have time at the moment", that's fine; I'm much the same myself :). Your userpage mentions article categorisation; if you have a look at the Calvinism Project webpage, that's one of the things on the todo list. Feel free to pitch in if you want.

Sure, I don't mind; just thought I'd make sure you don't think you're unwelcome :). -- TimNelson 12:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I looked at your user page, and, even though it didn't have your name on it, my first guess was that you're Nathaniel Pockras. Am I right?

(Btw, I only discovered the RP Userbox on your page; now it's on mine too :).

-- TimNelson 12:05, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I've basically gone: RP from Belle Centre; well, I only know two Pockrases from there. Then when I saw the Old English, I went "Hmm, I doubt there are too many other RPs in Belle Centre with that interest" (which either Allen or Zachery Blackwood mentioned to me), hence the guess.

And yes, I can read just enough OE to make out what your userbox says; I'm not sure of all the words, but enough :). -- TimNelson 12:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

--

Hmm. Good point; I'll see if I can't replace this with a direct quote from the document referenced

-- TimNelson 13:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding some Ohio County Infoboxes - I am slowly adding some too. FYI, the German Wikipedia articles all have the day, month and year founded for Ohio counties in their infoboxes (although Logan doesn't agree, German has 30 December 1817, English has 1818). Ruhrfisch 04:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Not sure what to do. You could always list both sources (1817, identified as legislature approval, and 1818, all other sources). Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch 04:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

The land that was formerly Franklin Township has been Incorporated/ Urbanized or annexed by Barberton, Norton, Clinton and, New Franklin. which Merged with the formerly unincorporated Franklin Township last year. Am I wrong? Captainkang 04:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I don't know, but I see nothing to suggest such a move. The township website gives no indications (instead, it speaks of the government that a defunct township doesn't have!), and there's nothing on the county website that I saw either. If you have a source for this, provide it, but all that I see suggests that it's still a civil township. Nyttend 05:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

If you click on the Link below and Scroll to the ohio list it'll show that the Census bureauDeleted the entry and why..Captainkang 18:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Clicky

I completely misunderstood this question — I thought you meant Franklin Township of Franklin County, which I had just added to the list of Franklin Townships when you left this comment. No wonder I couldn't find any evidence of such an annexation! Thanks! Nyttend 18:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed your addition of the Steelites to the list of RP churches. I moved them from there to the new Disambiguation section, because they explicitly reject being part of the RP church (also, the others mentioned all recognise each other, but not the Steelites).

Good idea having them listed, though.

Enjoy,

-- TimNelson 04:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, they certainly claim not to be associated with us anyway :). In a similar fashion, we (or the early RPs, anyway), claimed that we were the only true Presbyterian Church of Scotland, and the church calling itself that was actually illegitimate. But in order to avoid confusion, we took the "Reformed Presbyterian" name. I think that what the Steelites really care about in this is that they be identified as the true descendants of the Covenanters (I could be wrong, though).

The real question, I guess, is "What are we documenting on the page called Reformed Presbyterian Church?" I can see 3 options:

• Anyone who calls themselves Reformed Presbyterian: This means the page should be moved to "List of Reformed Presbyterian Churches", and have all the doctrinal stuff removed. Additionally, that sort of list probably isn't anything we want in Wikipedia except as a disambiguation page. So we could turn the whole thing into a disambiguation page.
• Anyone who calls themselves Reformed Presbyterian and is descended from the Covenanters: Problem; you'll note that the disambig section lists maybe 5 other groups calling themselves RPs. Now 2 or 3 of these are defunct, but the rest are descended from Covenanters. Again we may have to remove some of the doctrinal positions stuff, and I think we'd be better trying to construct a larger article about "splits in the Scottish Presbyterian Church and descended churches" which documents all this sort of thing.
• Those churches that are part of the mutually-recognising worldwide Reformed Presbyterian Church, of common descent: This is the one I'm arguing for, and the one I've been modifying the page to reflect.

Anyway, now you know what I think. If you think I've misidentified the issue (ie. "What are we documenting?"), or selected the wrong option as to what we're documenting, I'm interested in talking about it further, either on our talk pages, or on Talk:Reformed Presbyterian Church.

-- TimNelson 13:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you mind if I move theo whole conversation to the Talk:Reformed Presbyterian Church? Mostly from the point of view that I want to archive this for future reference of anyone else on the page.

Hmm. If you examine the link to the Reformed Presbyterian Church General Assembly (that I just corrected) and to Reformed Presbyterian Church (Hanover), you'll find that there are some differences. And what do we do when we start talking about Singapore and Uganda?

Now, the question still is, to my mind, what are we documenting?

Or, to put it a different way, what criteria are we using for including people on this page. The criteria I'm suggesting are:

• Descended from a common root (Covenanters)
• Mutually-recognising

Do you disagree with either of those?

Hopefully we'll end up with a better article when this is all done, anyway. Oh, and I agree that the Steelites definitely need to be somewhere, but the criteria in my head still say it belongs in disambig :).

-- TimNelson 14:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've moved it all to the Talk:Reformed Presbyterian Church page. The only change I made to your comments was to change the indenting. Feel free to remove stuff from here, although you might want to keep a cross-reference link.

-- TimNelson 14:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Which userboxen are messed up? They come out fine on my browser/screen resolution. Is it the ones that are down the right-hand side, at the bottom of the page?

-- TimNelson 14:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)