I am even further in your debt. Bless you, Ruhrfisch! You are a wonderful Wikicolleague. Tim riley (talk) 20:26, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NATIONAL LIBRARY OF BELARUS - MINSK.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:58, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Can you remind me how to determine which bridge photos are PD? I'm talking about the PD release you got from PennDOT for images such as File:Bridge in Cherrytree Township.jpg; I can't remember if it's all images related to the "Highway Bridges Owned by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation TR", or if it's just some of them, or if it's something else entirely. Someone's observed the destruction of Frantz's Bridge, and I'd like to add a PennDOT photo, but (1) I can't remember if its photos of the site can be used, (2) I can't get onto CRGIS to look at most of the photos [the server won't let me on, due to some sort of weird technical errors], and (3) the only photo I can find is the one attached to its nomination form. Nyttend (talk) 18:44, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but now I'm confused — why do you think that the TR doesn't include Frantz's? It was listed in 1988 (six years after the TR went through), but NRIS puts it as part of the TR, and its nomination was prepared by a PennDOT guy in 1982, using the same setup as bridges that are definitely part of the TR. Nyttend (talk) 17:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the upload, and no problems; it's been long enough since I did much with the PA listings that I figured I'd forgotten or overlooked something significant. And thanks for the Kooser compliment; my brother was married in Somerset a week and a half ago, so I took a few spare minutes to get a few quick pictures. Perhaps you saw that I added an already-online photo from the Laurel Hill RDA; I visited there myself as well, but it was extremely foggy and thus very difficult to get more than one building in any picture. Nyttend (talk) 16:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

The picture I put on the Somerset County NR list was File:LHSP CCC Cabin.jpg, which had already been in the Laurel Hill SP infobox. I've not uploaded any images that I took there. Nyttend (talk) 17:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

You kindly mentioned on my talk that you would review the images at FAC. I've just nominated the article; I think the images are much as they were at the peer review, but a further review (and any general comments) would be much appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, in case you didn't get a notification, I have replied to your comment on the Rite of Spring talk page. Thanks! Kongming819 (talk) 15:10, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Re the last sentence of the lead, you are absolutely right that "stoicism" is a perfectly appropriate term to use in connection with evaluations of Scott. I do however think "but" is not the best conjunction in that sentence, and that "and" would be better: . . . emphasising his personal bravery and stoicism while acknowledging his errors, and ascribing his expedition's fate primarily to misfortune. Feel free to accept or ignore as you see fit. Awien (talk) 12:03, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Let's let it be - aka let sleeping hornets lie. Awien (talk) 13:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Very fond of Costa Rica. Not so sure about Doña Laura. Awien (talk) 13:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC) And the (your?) chinchillas are beyond cute. I'm an incurable sucker for little fluffy critters. Awien (talk) 15:56, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Please close Wikipedia:Peer review/Whaam!/archive1 so that I can begin a WP:FAC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I have recently uploaded this image from another website. As it stands, it is too long for the article it is meant for: The Diary of a Nobody. Unfortunately, I don't seem to be able to crop it, after several unsuccessful attempts, though it's a procedure I've not had problems with before. Perhaps the software has changed – I don't know. I want it to be cropped to the point just below where the lady's hands meet; would it be possible for you to do this? I would very much appreciate it.

[9] Here's a picture I recently found of the town of Ricketts. Not sure if it can be used in Ricketts, Pennsylvania or in Ricketts Glen State Park Gerry D (talk) 22:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

It might be worth browsing Mac's flickr photostream. He doesn't really tag stuff very well, so it might be a slog. Otherwise I think the post card would work for the RGSP article. Gerry D (talk) 20:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

About the disambig links—despite your encouragement, and my agreement that it might seem reasonable for me to add the piped links, I truly avoid any direct edits, on account of Jimbo's stated position that editors with a financial COI never directly edit articles.

If that doesn't seem too silly, both of the links that need fixing are found in references in the Development section. As currently numbered, these are references 10 and 20. You can find them that way, or Ctrl-F for the existing wikilinks; here are the piped replacements:

• [[Columbia College, Columbia University|Columbia College]]
• [[The Hill (newspaper)|The Hill]]

If you can help, great. If it's too much bother, I'll understand, and perhaps I can raise it at FAC. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:45, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Just saw you've taken care of it, and thank you for doing so! WWB Too (Talk · COI) 19:59, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ruhrfisch, could use your expertise if you have a moment. Ceoil and I have the Dresden Triptych (from the 1430s) at FAC, [10] and a question has been raised about the frames, [11]. The frames are inscribed with Latin phrasing, and the painting with frames is meant to be an integrated piece of work. Any advice? Victoria (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

If you update the list of categories for VeblenBot to scan, please use the address http://tools.wmflabs.org/veblenbot/cats/cats.cgi instead of the address on toolserver.org. I have migrated this off of the toolserver now. Thanks, — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey there, I've looked into your feedback on the C-SPAN Talk page and left you a detailed response, with suggestions. I'm looking forward to your reply! Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 02:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, I wanted to let you know that after today I'm going to be mostly away from my computer for a week—I am heading to Wikimania in Hong Kong—so if you leave any comments on the C-SPAN article, I most likely won't be able to look at it until 8/12 at the earliest. Best, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:44, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

• As a listed DYK participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions00:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Look for it here (pictured, will keep it even longer on my user, I saw that performance) and here, for motion ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

At this stage in my life I'm hardly likely to go all soft and start giving out barnstars, but if I was....thanks for helping us at the Dresden page. I'm blowing hot and cold on the discussion, and evidently getting fustrated at times. Not at you, your a rock of sence and pragmatism, as ever. Please accept my invisable barnstar to mark this non event. Ceoil (talk) 19:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

This just passed. Thank you for your continued insight and help. Ceoil (talk) 16:08, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

One thing that comes to my mind when thinking of those two lads - would they want us to spend (or waste) our time musing about their individual AND joint misfortunes - blaming the one or the other and condemning either or would they prefer us to do something more constructive and PEACEFUL than leading a war that has been battled for too ling. Wouldn't both probably would despise this behaviour? Wouldn't they prefer people not being divided but rather be UNITED...--Commissioner Gordon (talk) 19:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I have absolutely no idea which two great men you are talking about - I assume you mean Scott and Oates? I know I am not great, so it can't be me ;-) I am trying to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and protect the adherence of an FA article to WP:WIAFA. What is it specifically that we should do to be "united"? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:54, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I mean Scottleton and Shack. Don't you know those two from the parallel dimensions? They are new crossings between Robert and Ernest.

Principally, I think all people are great. I like to quote my man Mimo, who once said "I like everyone". Or was it "I like anyone". English is deaficult lankuage and olso verry errrm-bitchious. arrrh, forgot signink of postink :-( --Commissioner Gordon (talk) 20:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I seriously doubt either man knows or cares what we do here, but if they did I hope that they would want their articles to be as accurate and neutral as possible. Wir koennen auf deutsch plaudern, wenn Sie wollen. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Also auf gut deutsch gesagt, beide haben Ihre Totenruhe und haben sich noch zu Lebzeiten wohlwollend übereinander geäußert, wo es für Sie eine Leichtigkeit gewesen wäre, übereinanderherzufallen, aber Sie taten es nicht, respektierten einander und würden auch wollen, daß alle nachgeborenen "Fans" nach der Maxime handeln: "Behandele Dein Gegenüber mit Respekt, so wie Du selbst behandelt werden willst". Ich persönlich, ohne mich jetzt in den ALLERhöchsten Tönen loben zu wollen ;-) , mache hauptsächlich eines, ich VERTEIDIGE, und GREIFE NIEMANDEN AN. Ich stürze mich jetzt nicht auf Shack weil er da irgendwie diese Katzen getötet hat (obwohl ich so jemand prinzipiell schon für recht "verschroben" halten würde, aber ich weiß nicht in welchem mentalen Ausnahemzustand er sich da befunden hat). Aber gleichzeitig kann ich es auf den Tod nicht ausstehen, wenn jemand unter Vortäuschung und/oder Übertreibung der Tatsachen die Schuld in die Schuhe geschoben, bzw. jemand als schlechter Mensch verumglimpft werden soll (siehe Scott). Es gibt ein Ying und ein Yang und der ein oder andere bekomment eben ein wenig zuviel von dem einen oder anderen ab. Ist jedoch beileibe kein Grund, IRGENDJEMAND ZU VERURTEILEN.--Commissioner Gordon (talk) 21:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Und irgendwie wäre ich sogar froh, Du wärst dieser "Jamiri", denn dann könnte man diese Meinungsverschiedenheiten bereden und aus der Welt schaffen. Aber so hat mich jemand angeschwärzt und unter Vortäuschung falscher Tatsachen mundtot gemacht, und wie gesagt, jemanden verurteilen, ist so ziemlich das asozialste was man machen kann, und ich kann mich jetzt jeden Tag mit diesen Lügen auseinander setzen.--Commissioner Gordon (talk) 21:21, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I think it is faster for me to write in English and you in German. I am not Jamiri (who I believe you said earlier is the editor on the German Wikipedia you were in a disagreement with, who banned you there). If you want to make your own web page and write up your opinions on Scott and Shackleton and Amundsen and whoever else, then feel free to do so and do it however you want. But, if you want to edit on Wikipedia (whether German or English), then you have to follow the Wikipedia rules, which you are not doing and apparently have no intention of doing. Articles must maintain a Neutral Point of View and represent all major views on a subject as expressed in reliable sources. Actions have consequences here on Wikipedia and in the real world. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Also mal Butter bei die Fische, DU bist derjenige, der massenweise Wikipedia Grundsätze nicht beachtet, und versucht, aus Scott den "Villain" zu machen.

Scott kann nichts dafür, daß die Menschen ihm mehr Ehrerbietung erwiesen haben als Shackleton (kein Wunder, Scott ist völlig verfrüht aus dem Leben gerissen worden). Du wehrst Dich mit Händen und Füßen gegen alles, was Scott in ein postiveres Licht rückt. Auch der englische Text ist voll von den Sachen, die Du mir unterstellst (mangelnde Zitate etc.). Du verteidigst etwas, was in vielen Bereichen einfach offenkundigst voreingenommen und tendenziös ist, und gleichzeitig wirfst Du mir das vor, was Du die ganze Zeit falsch machst. Ich sage hier kann irgendwas nicht mit rechten Dingen zugeben und Fans einer bestimmten Person (vielleicht Shackleton?) haben kein Recht, andere, die die Leute halt aufgrund der Umstände mehr in ihr Herz geschlossen haben, schlechtzureden und zu diffamieren. Genau das tust Du mit Deiner ganzen offenkundigen Strategie des Schlechtredens und -machens. Und wie gesagt, Shackleton hätte das so nicht gewollt.--Commissioner Gordon (talk) 22:09, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I've added (EXTREMELY VALUABLE AND IMPORTANT;-) information about the character of some of the Terra Nova Ponies in the Terra Nova article. Just to circumvent someone claiming he has not been informed about an edit from me ;-) --Commissioner Gordon (talk) 19:55, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

You helped me a short while back with the crop of the Daisy Mutlar image (above). I've now nominated the article at FAC (despite the logjam there). If you could see your way to doing a general image review I'd be most grateful. I don't think there are any hidden problems there, but one never knows. Brianboulton (talk) 19:30, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

The article is doing pretty well at FAC, and I think the image view has been done. But if you could see your way to doing a sources review instead, thatb would be very much appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 22:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

You mentioned about the Duino Elegies that the infobox should mention that the source is in German. I felt the same, we are working on it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikisource original language was just made available, and the article the first where I used it! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:07, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda. I am not sure the original German publisher needs to be in the Infobox of an English article, but at least the Wikisource link is clearer now. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:56, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

The publisher doesn't "need to be", and I would not suggest a publisher without an article, - but it doesn't take extra space and helps those who know. A first publisher in English might be added if known. - It was a very fast approach, intentionally kept simple. Did you see the conversation? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

ps: sorry, when I said "no extra space", I confused the template with ((infobox musical composition)), for example Symphony No. 8 (Bruckner), where year and publisher go together, - I just found out that the infobox there dates back to 2007, couldn't believe it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:50, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I did not carefully read the article's talk page - just saw mention of it on Arbcom pages and mostly looked at the article briefly. It seems to me that if the publisher is not important enough to be in the lead, then it does not need to be in the Infobox (especially when I would imagine the current work has several publishers in several languages). Note this is NOT my asking that the publisher be added to the lead to justify its inclusion in the infobox - no one thought it belonged there through a successful FAC and TFA, so leave it out of the lead. And, if it is not in the lead, my thought is it need not be in the Infobox (if consensus is to include one at all ;-) ). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:34, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

We can't read every talk page ;) (+ he archives quickly) - My most frequent infoboxes are Bach's works. (German, French, Dutch Wikipedias all have them.) The standard lead for the 200+ cantatas is a very brief "title - BWV# - occasion - location - first performance". Some made it to GA, those have more lead, see BWV 103. Even the ones with a short lead have additional information in the infobox about number of movements, text sources (typically three in one cantata), scoring and relationship to other works. In the article, I expect people to be first interested in the history, so that's first in the article, but a musician might just want to know if his instrument is featured. Looking forward to hearing three of them tonight! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:08, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I heard that great concert, and mentioned it on the Main page, quoted on top of my talk. The (male continuo) members of the orchestra rose to sing the finale chorale with the (already standing) ladies on violins, violas and oboes - an unforgettable experience. - If you looked (at the top of my talk) you saw the translation of the words, a prayer. - Elegies: I would like to work amicably with all whom I proclaimed precious and see them on different sides of a battle which I don't understand (although I have been on both sides) and which leaves me hurt. (look for "shouted" on my user.) I placed "letting go of the past" on my talk in February, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, Ruhrfisch. It seems you're quite busy elsewhere on Wikipedia at the moment. I'm wondering if you might be able to suggest an editor who could help implement the suggestions you made on the C-SPAN Talk page a couple of weeks ago? As you know I've really had a hard time attracting editors to this Talk page. Otherwise, I'll probably take it to FAC before the end of the week, and please follow up with your suggested changes whenever you like. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 17:58, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Ruhrfisch. You have new messages at WWB Too's talk page.
Message added 04:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hi Ruhrfisch,

I know you uploaded them over 7 years ago but do you happen to know what the colors mean on your PA school district maps like this one? I want to add a keep to them. Thanks for creating them! gren グレン 07:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I think it was a bit late in my time zone when I was reading the map. For some reason I was thinking you had two colors next to each other rather than reading it as Garnet Vallet SD is made up for Bethel, Concord, and Chester Heights. Thank you for clarifying. gren グレン 18:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm intrigued by your map of the PA state parks, and would like to look into doing it for CT (and maybe other places) I'm guessing your starting points are the geocoords for each park, then an algorithm to convert into position locations. If so, can you share it? It would seem like I could reproduce if I can pull together the geocoords of CT state parks, as well as needing, presumably, the geocoords of the corners of a CT state map.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 19:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. A tiny note about spelling. "organisations" is the British English spelling of the word, so doesn't require a [sic] in your comment at [12]. Every little bit of friendliness helps. :) –Quiddity (talk) 20:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Quiddity - I actually knew that (as well as the quote about "The United States and Great Britain are two countries separated by a common language."). I've noticed that when Pigsonthewing copies and pastes what other editors wrote, he will use [sic] to point out any errors, so I was trying to make a little joke (which obviously did not work at all). I appreciate your taking the time to tell me, and will increase my labo(u)rs to not let humo(u)r colo(u)r my edits. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

PS I was so busy being silly here that I missed your point: "Every little bit of friendliness helps." I have accordingly removed my sic and made the spelling in my section follow AE. Thanks and sorry, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:51, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

PPS And apologized. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks :) And yah, humo(u)r is indeed very difficult to convey in text. Sadly the irony mark (and variants) never caught on, and the original (Emoticon#Creation_of_:-.29_and_:-.28) emoticon suggestion "for joke markers" was quickly subsumed! –Quiddity (talk) 22:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Putting "(joke)" after a comment does not work well either. Sigh, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/2012–13 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team/archive1 just closed. Are we now letting PRs close with no review?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

PRs are closing without review because there are insufficient editors prepared to spend time reviewing articles there. There is no longer a cohort of dedicated editors (basically Ruhrfisch, Finetooth and myself) prepared to cover 20 to 30 reviews apiece each month to ensure that every PR got attention. After doing this for several years, we wore ourselves out and found more interesting things to do. Efforts to persuade other editors to review at PR on a regular basis, even to the extent of maybe three or four a month, have failed. So the situation is now that up to half of peer review nominations are closed without comment; unfortunately this won't change, until editors are more generally prepared to commit to the PR process. Brianboulton (talk) 09:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

but stilled wanted to say hi after all this time and ask you a question. The last article on which I was working was Connotations (Copland). For it, I had received permission from the New York Philharmonic Archives to use a picture of Aaron Copland and Leonard Bernstein together during rehearsals for the world premiere of Connotations. However, Commons has deleted this image twice. This was probably my fault as I don't really know what info, banners, whatever I should use to get the powers that be to realize that yes, it's okay to use this. Any advice? Thanks and hope to hear from you soon. Jonyungk (talk) 00:34, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I think most arbs don't look kindly on editors bringing discussions to their pages as opposed to the PD page; I don't engage editors there. Any emails we get about the case, we tell the senders to post it publicly unless it's a matter of private evidence, etc. I'm sorry the arbitration case is stressful for you. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 23:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

In 2010, you helped to decide what we should do with two National Register listings that had proven to be the same place; the discussion can be seen at Talk:Twin Oaks (Wyoming, Ohio). I've found another such situation and asked for help at the "Cedar Point Light" section of WT:NRHP. Would you be willing to chime in? Nyttend (talk) 03:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

My first take on this character - Amanda Jane Mason was users Rinpoche, or Mattisse or Davenbelle (Jack Merridew) or possibly Research Method. Thanks for your SPI...Modernist (talk) 11:58, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

For the traditionally visible barnstar; the implied ones are grand, but they do grow tiresome after a while, no? Anyways I always thought you were a great guy, this has been reinforced serveral times over the last few weeks, in quite a few instances. Go well and prosper! Ruhrfisch. Ceoil (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, I found your name listed as someone who can help out with DYK nominations. I have a DYK nomination that has been sitting for awhile and was wondering if you might be able to review? Thank you.Hmlarson (talk) 04:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Please disregard my previous request. I've decided to withdraw the nomination. Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 05:17, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

You have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer. Would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia? Would you like to read an interesting article about something different? If so, you are invited to give a thorough review of the article Xiaxue, which is about a Singaporean celebrity blogger. The article is very short and should not take long to review. Hope you enjoy reviewing it as much as I enjoyed writing it. Thanks! 谢谢！Terima kasih! நன்றி! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 12:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your useful input! Please check the peer review page again for additional clarifications and questions. Have a nice day! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 08:51, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

As a Wilpo/Salladasburg native who's been displaced to Phoenix, AZ and very much misses his creeks and woods and wildlife, thanks! I came across a photo of yours (Cohick's and the church) tonight when someone got me yakkin' about I-99, and then I found your userpage with some beautiful photos of my home. And with a damn good license, too! You just made my day.

Apologies if this isn't the proper place.

Regards, Rob Lynn rjlynn -at- gmail -dot- com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.250.74 (talk) 07:44, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I am very glad that you both appreciate my contributions and that you took the time to thank me. If you know Salladasburg, you might like the articles on Larrys Creek and Cogan House Covered Bridge. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:23, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Having bothered you for your expertise on images over the years, may I ask you, as an image expert, to look in at Elizabeth David bibliography, where an editor with views on images is in conflict with other editors (self included). Grateful for your impartial judgment, if you have time and inclination to look in and comment. Tim riley (talk) 18:04, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if you're still watching developments. If so, you will see that my latest (and final) effort to find a compromise is the "identibox", which excludes all detail apart from the name of the work and its author. This responds to the concerns of those who object to the repetition of information in the first lead paragraph, while still providing instant identification to the passing page-hopper. Like any compromise this runs the risk of pleasing no one, but I want to run with it for a bit (it is basically the same as the boxless Rite of Spring but with a title on top). In a couple of days I'm going to nominate the article at FAC; the matter will no doubt be aired there, but if you can spare the time to offer a pre-comment, that would be welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 22:12, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I have nominated L'Arianna, b*x and all, at FAC. Let us see what transpires there. Brianboulton (talk) 20:40, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Ruhrfisch. It's been a little while since we last talked about C-SPAN so I wanted to check in with you. As I mentioned back in August, I am pursuing FA status for this article and the request has been active at FAC since August 19. I'm a bit worried that it is in jeopardy of being archived since there has not been much discussion, so I'm trying to find editors who might be able to review this. If you are interested in reviewing the article or contributing to the discussion on the FAC page, it would be most appreciated. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 01:52, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, Ruhrfisch. I meant to leave you a note yesterday saying I'd responded to your comments on at FAC; well, here it is now! Also, I would appreciate you making edits, because I do avoid all article space edits where I have a financial COI. Let me know if you have any questions about my responses, and I'm hoping to have an answer on John D. Evans today or tomorrow. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 17:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, I see you've gone ahead and made the changes we discussed on the FAC page. Thanks for taking the time to do that. I wanted to let you know that I am still looking into the portion of the Development section about Evans that you mentioned. I've been out of town and haven't had the chance to look into this properly yet, but I'm thinking there is probably a more concise way of stating the information in the last few sentences of this section. I'll follow up with you about this soon. Meanwhile, if you have any more comments on the article I'd love to hear them. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 18:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch, I saw an article on Kinzu in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette a couple of weeks ago and thought it might be useful for you in your efforts. It's in the Sunday Magazine September 15, 2013 section E. Kinzua Colors, Gretchen McKay. I have a hard copy if you cannot find it online. auntieruth (talk) 21:05, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I believe this is the article. Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 21:17, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - this is great! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Great "little" article, and Thanks to Niagara​​ for the link....auntieruth (talk) 18:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you lower protection level to either unprotection or PC? --George Ho (talk) 04:56, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ruhrfisch, I went to the FAC page just a little bit ago to reply to you about your recent edits and was disappointed to see that my submission has been archived. I've gone ahead and left my reply for you on the C-SPAN Talk page instead. I'm hoping we can resolve these last few issues there as I really would like to resubmit in a few weeks. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 22:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, I've followed up with you on the C-SPAN Talk page about the information on Evans and the other founders in the History section. Let me know what you think once you've had time to review. Have a great weekend. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 21:08, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Regarding clarification: when I started writing on Bach cantatas half of them were red links. So if per pure chance I hit a red link I may add an infobox, otherwise (for example expanding one unsourced line to a sourced article) not? Makes sense?? Not to me. - Where is consistency for our readers? Most Bach cantatas have an infobox, for example BWV 103, approved as GA by Smerus. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Gerda, it was Arbcom's decision, not mine. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:34, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Question regarding the ArbCom discussion: if someone wants to expand an article, say to 5X and take it to DYK or even to GA or FA, how do they do that without an infobox? Infoboxes are standard for any and all DYKs, GAs and FAs. Wouldn't that restrict not only expansion of articles, but the person's editing as well? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Neutralhomer, per the MOS and quoting ArbCom's decision here "The use of infoboxes is neither required nor prohibited for any article by site policies or guidelines. Whether to include an infobox, which infobox to include, and which parts of the infobox to use, is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article." I am a main author of several FAs which do not have an infobox - see for example Waterfalls in Ricketts Glen State Park. None of the FLs I helped write have a box either. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:21, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Maybe I'm thinking along the lines of articles like Gerda's BWV 103, my FA Stephens City, Virginia and radio station articles like WKEY (AM) (a GA), all of which have infoboxes. In the latter two, it is perfered that they have infoboxes and I don't think the Stephens City article would have made it through FA without one.

You are right though, some articles can by taken to GA or FA without an infobox, but some are required and some editors are sticklers for them and won't !vote to support a GA or FA without one. This is where a problem would arise. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:29, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

If an editor at GAN or FAC thought a box was required, the situation could be explained and I think someone else could add the box in that case. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

That's why I offered, so she wouldn't get in trouble, pages could be expanded, everyone is happy. I don't feel as I would be a PROXY, but would be adding something to the page. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be best to leave that to the GA/FA reviewer? If a reviewer asks for an infobox and Gerda explains her restriction, I'm sure they'd be happy to add one. But then again, the reviewer may not require one, so why anticipate their decision? Choess (talk) 16:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Choess. I think this is something best left up to a neutral reviewer. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, I would be grateful for any comments on Saul (Handel), which I expanded from a stub and have listed for peer review. I have been creating and expanding articles on works of Handel and plan to do more so would like comments as to what the article may need adding to it ( or taking away from it).ThanksSmeat75 (talk) 00:11, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

You recently participated in the FAC review of L'Arianna which resulted in the article's promotion. Could you spare a minute to look at, and possibly make a comment on, a discussion on the article's talkpage, here, about a proposed change to the article's lead image. Many thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 21:52, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/PAHMC; it's a request for the deletion of images of Pennsylvania historical markers. Do I remember rightly that you got via OTRS a release of all historical marker texts under a CCbysa-compatible license? The nominator's sole reason for nominating these images is that they're copyvios, so presumably all of the images could be kept if you could provide a relevant permission statement. Nyttend (talk) 05:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ruhrfisch. I've been pretty busy lately and I just realized that it's been awhile since we talked about C-SPAN. So I'm here today to remind you that I shared my suggestion for how to update the Development section and clarify the information about Evans on the Talk page; I hope you'll have time to look at this soon.

I also just added a short request at the very end of the thread about updating C-SPAN's XM radio channel in the article. SiriusXM recently moved the C-SPAN channel, but the old channel is still listed in the article. I've also mentioned this to Awardgive, so I'm hoping one of you can make this quick fix. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi again. It looks like you haven't been on Wikipedia much in the last week and I'm assuming the little time you do have is dedicated to other projects. I believe I have now waited the full 14 days necessary to resubmit to FAC, so I'm hoping to do that later this week. Will you have time to look at my suggestion on the Talk page for the Development section soon? If possible, I'd like to tie up that loose end before resubmitting. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 21:08, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

This is now  Done. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:35, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I have just uploaded File:StellaGibbons.jpg, for non-free use on the Stella Gibbons article. From similar past experience I believe that the size of the image may need to be reduced. Also, the resolution aspect needs to be checked. Could I presume on your kindness to look at these things? Brianboulton (talk) 22:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ruhrfisch, you were recommended as a go-to guru of image formatting syntax at a FAC we currently have for Homer Davenport. In short, we have three nice image galleries of four images each in the article, but though all three are set to the same fixed height (250px), they show up at varying sizes in some browsers. In my browser, (Safari 6.1 on a Mac and monobook skin on WP) they are all the same height, each with four images that almost precisely fill the page. But another user finds the second gallery to be much larger than the other two, another user finds it smaller, and a third person says all three are the same in Windows 7 with Crome but not in Windows 8 with Crome. What's even weirder is that when I fiddle with the sizes, in my browser, the images in one gallery will shrink down, but others will load smaller, then suddenly just go "pop" back to the same larger size. So, WTF? Can you take a look at the gallery syntax and the images, perhaps let us know at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Homer Davenport/archive1 if it's something you can or cannot fix. Wehwalt and I are co-lead editors here, we both like the larger image size, so that's the goal, but we do want all three galleries to appear in a consistent format across multiple platforms. Thanks in advance for anything you can do.! Montanabw^(talk) 21:35, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you with more Scott hassle, but could you look at File:Cross on Observation Hill, McMurdo Station.jpg, which has been added to the article in place of an earlier image. I'm not convinced by the licencing, and doubt that this is a free image. No source details are given beyond an uninformative link, though it is obviously a fairly recent photograph. I am inclined to delete it and restore the former, but would welcome your view. Brianboulton (talk) 09:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

You wrote Let me know if the History section runs into trouble at FAC in a Peer Review after suggesting that the History section should come first (I know, this was a long time ago). Although that article passed FA and I have written several other articles in that style, the principle has been pretty consistently criticised at FA. So much so that I intend to stop doing it that way and may even retrospectively change past articles. The latest discussion at FA is happening at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Waveguide filter/archive2. The problem that arises is that the history section introduces terms and concepts that have not yet been fully explained. If one tries to put all the explanation in the history section one ultimately ends up with the whole article in the history. Not particularly looking for any action from you, just thought you would like to know. SpinningSpark 14:07, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi amigo, long time no see! How are you? Still working on Chicago topics? I was wondering if you could make me a montage based on something like User:Dr. Blofeld/Copenhagen montage?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

It's OK now, thanks anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:34, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Black Shoe Diaries a Penn State fan site linked to two of our articles today. Fair Play Men and Big Runaway are being used in an article about Penn State's upcoming wrestling match against Lock Haven. [13] is a link to the blog. Interesting connection. Gerry D (talk) 15:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello. How are things going? When you get a chance, please close Wikipedia:Peer review/Kinky Boots (musical)/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ruhrfisch, this isn't something I know much about, not being an admin and all, but Heminway's In Our Time has been moved to a new name, [14], which affects many many links that I've worked on carefully and in particular links in FA articles. Is it okay to move pages without a move request or seeking consensus? Just wanted your opinion, or maybe that of one your talk page watchers, since it looks like I'll be spending Thanksgiving working on tidying links. Cranky as usual, Victoria (talk) 23:25, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

In May 2012 you were one of the reviewers who commented on this article at the FAC which led to its promotion. I have recently noticed that an editor has added a substantial amount of text to the article, without talkpage discussion and of course without review. I have outlined some concerns on the article's talk, here. I would greatly appreciate it if you could look at the page and give a reviewer's opinion on this new material. Brianboulton (talk) 22:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)