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.

Archives

1) 7/9/2005 – 8/27/2006   2) 8/31/2006 - 11/17/2006   3) 11/21/2006 - 1/13/2007   4) 1/13/2007 - 3/13/2007   5) 3/13/2007 - 5/10/2007   6) 5/16/2007 - 7/11/2007   7) 7/12/2007 - 9/25/2007   8) 9/25/2007 - 11/15/2007   9) 11/1512007 - 1/16/2008 10) 1/16/2008 - 2/20/2008 11) 2/21/2008 - 3/27/2008 12) 3/27/2008 - 4/30/2008 13) 5/1/2008 - 6/1/2008 14) 6/1/2008 - 7/1/2008 15) 7/1/2008 - 8/1/2008 16) 8/1/2008 - 8/31/2008 17) 8/11/2008 - 10/1/2008 18) 10/1/2008 - 11/1/2008 19) 11/1/2008 - 1/1/2009 20) 1/1/2009 - 2/28/2009 21) 3/1/2009 - 4/1/2009 22) 4/1/2009 - 5/1/2009 23) 5/1/2009 - 7/1/2009 24) 7/1/2009 - 9/2/2009 25) 9/2/2009 - 11/1/2009 26) 11/1/2009 - 12/31/2009 27) 1/1/2010 - 2/28/2010 28) 3/1/2010 - 4/30/2010 29) 5/1/2010 - 6/30/2010 30) 7/1/2010 - 930/2010 31) 10/1/2010 - 12/31/2010 32) 1/1/2011 - 3/31/2011 33) 4/1/2011 - 8/1/2011 34) 8/1/2011 - 9/30/2011 35) 10/1/2011 - 12/1/2011 36) 12/1/2011 - 2/29/2012 37) 3/1/2012 - 8/31/2012 38) 9/1/2012 - 2/28/2013 39) 2/28/2013 - 11/30/2013 40) 12/3/2013 - 9/23/2016 41) 9/24/2016 - 12/31-2019

Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a message below and I will reply on your talk page. Although my email address is enabled, it is not an address I check often (so I may be slow in replying to email). Please also note that while I am glad to do a peer review on just about any article, I do not have the time to do copyedits (sorry). Thanks for stopping by and happy editing! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Long time no wiki talk. Could you look at the Blue Röyster Cult section on the Evan Royster article for me. I don't think it meets the notability standards for wiki. I have brought this up on the Royster talk page. I am in a wikilull right now. I may get more active soon or I may not. Football season usually gets me more active. Hope all is well. Dincher (talk) 19:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for checking on on this. As for UPB, I don't think that a PR is needed. It should do fine as it is for a GAN. Doing it first and then moving onto Hyner sounds like a good idea too. Dincher (talk) 22:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes getting a DYK for Hnyer View sounds like a good idea. It can't hurt to try to get Hyner Run to FA, too. I do agree that they aren't as similar as the ones at the Grand Canyon, but I think it's still doable. Dincher (talk) 22:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I noticed your work on the map of Millenium Park and I was wondering if you could help me out. I'm working on the article Dougherty Valley High School, currently a GA. I think one of the major next steps for the article is that it needs more images, and a user-created PNG or SVG map of the school would be great to include. Your previous work is very close to the kind of style I was thinking of, and if you could help out it'd be tremendously appreciated. If you're wondering, the school looks like this. Anyway, I hope you'll consider it, and if not at least point me in the direction of someone who can help. Thanks :). --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 06:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

No, nothing would need the wikilink formatting like the Millennium Park map has. Go ahead and take your time; I don't have any timeline for working on that article, since it's been a long-term project anyway (since summer '07, before the school even opened). Thanks again! --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 03:40, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

The parking lot and the road don't really need any detail at all -- Just solid gray coloring and labeling the parking lot and street names. --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 03:57, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, it looks great! I don't mind that the housing or non-school zones aren't filled in, they aren't especially relevant anyway. Any labeling other than the blue and red stars for open areas during breaks should be on the map; the distinction between student parking and faculty parking, and street names, are also important and should be labeled. Thanks again! --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 20:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, that's exactly what I wanted. I really cannot thank you enough for making this map, I'm really happy with the final product. I've already added it to the article, so you can go ahead and move it to the Commons (I really should move some of the other files for the school... I think I'll do this tomorrow). Thanks for taking time out of your busy schedule for a school map! --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 05:30, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Jackbooted Thug redirects to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, for two years now. Could you remedy this good sir?--IvoShandor (talk) 10:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

As someone who has done a lot of work on WP:CHICAGO articles you may have an opinion. Feel free to come vote at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chicago/Assessment#Current_Top-importance_Candidates for our next Category:Top-importance Chicago articles. Voting continues until September 10 and nominations/discussions are ongoing for future ballot candidates at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago/Assessment.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Ruhrfisch, I just wanted to say thanks for all your comments, since you said you don't watchlist peer reviews and won't see it there. Anyway, I really appreciate your suggestions, and will try to get to them over the next week (and PR an article from the backlog). Best, Ricardiana (talk) 00:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I received both emails; thanks very much! I'll get to them after I finish working on a current project of sorting locations for Cuyahoga County, Ohio NRHP listings. Just one question — how did you attach the images? I can't find an attach feature at Special:EmailUser. Nyttend (talk) 23:40, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know: Portal:Christmas/Selected article/11. Good work! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:44, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm in the final stages of prepping this for FAC. If you'd like to help, that's great. See Talk:Black_Hawk_War#Two_suggestions. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:20, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Black Hawk War

I just listed this at FAC. Input appreciated. The nom is here. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Here's the list of recently done PRs. One's really short (Laugh, Laugh) because I really couldn't find anything wrong with it. :) I think all, maybe except one, were reviewed from the backlog.

• Wikipedia:Peer review/Laugh, Laugh/archive1
• Wikipedia:Peer review/Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics/archive2
• Wikipedia:Peer review/List of tallest buildings and structures in Liverpool/archive1
• Wikipedia:Peer review/Goa/archive2
• Wikipedia:Peer review/Chris Jackson (gridiron football)/archive1
• Wikipedia:Peer review/List of West Bromwich Albion F.C. records/archive1

Thanks a lot! Maxim_(talk) 14:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I have left a note on the PR request for 2009 ACC Championship Game. Could you just check that I am being fair? Basically I am saying that the article (only 450 words) isn't ready to be reviewed, mainly because the game which is its subject won't be played until December! Brianboulton (talk) 00:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I've seen you've done some amazing work with creeks. I was wondering if you would collaborate with me on one near where I live such as Darby Creek, Cobbs Creek, Ithan Creek, Ridley Creek, Crum Creek, Valley Creek, French Creek, Brandywine River, Chester Creek, etc. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 00:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I wanted to take a moment just to thank you for your thoughtful PR suggestions. I have implemented a couple of your ideas already, and hope to complete the others soon. Thanks again for the feedback. Take care,Gongshow ^⊕ 06:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ruhrfisch! I replied your comments on the Peer review for Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. Cheers; Felipe Menegaz 19:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

This one might be up your creek :) Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Ruhrfisch. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/Post Oak Mall/archive2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 09:47, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

• Request 1: Would you mind taking over the PR backlog, Monday through Thursday (I'll do tonight's)? I will be off-wiki on those days. This also means I won't be doing peer reviews next week, so I hope traffic remains fairly light.
• Request 2: The old chestnut of vandalism and Robert Falcon Scott. The activity is unceasing. I would like to spruce up this article (alt text, new sources, refresh some prose etc). Would it be possible to semiprotect while I do this?
• Proposition: My next featured article project is Nansen's Fram voyage. I began working on this last year, when I went to Norway and Northern Russia, but I got sidetracked by operas and archbishops. I will need help with some important and quite complicated maps. Rather than my asking you to do this as a favour, would you consider being a co-nom for this article? I have loads of source materials and would do all the prose, as well as providing the parameters for the maps. The article will be built in a sandbox, per my usual practice and I would expect to have the first draft posted by the end of this month, peer review around 5-6 October, and then see what happens. Could you let me know if you'd be interested? Obviously I don't know what your personal plans are for the next months, so if what I'm suggesting isn't possible of course I'll understand. But I'd be very pleased if you agree. Brianboulton (talk) 17:50, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your swift reply and for the action on Scott. I'll do the cleanup within the next month. As to the Nansen maps, there are two main ones needed. The first will show the tracks of Fram's voyage, drift and Nansen's march. This is the basic map, it's a slightly altered version of the one in my first edition of Nansen's Farthest North (probably comes from a slightly later edition). The map is overdetailed and scarcely legible, so there's no point in simply adopting it, even though I reckon it is PD. I need a map which clearly shows the five main tracks:-

• Fram's voyage to the ice (dotted line on this map), from Vardø eastwards, generally following the northern Siberian coast to beyond Cape Chelyuskin, where it veers north to the point where Fram was frozen in.
• Fram's drift in the ice (unbroken line) moving generally north and east to near the 10°E meridian, where it veers sharply south towards Spitsbergen. The drift was not constant, hence the gyrations at various stages.
• Fram's return to Tromsø - a straight line from Spitsbergen to Tromsø.
• Nansen & Johansen's sledge and kayak journey: faintly discernable as a dotted line that moves north from the Fram drift and reaches a point marked "Nansen's Farthest North. The line then zigzags south and west to Franz Josef Land, and then wriggles through the archipelago to a point just decipherable as Cape Flora.
• Nansen's return to Vardø: A simple dogleg showing Nansen's return to Vardø from Cape Flora aboard SS Windward.

The second map will be a detailed chart of the kayak voyage through the Franz Josef archipelago. I am still looking for something to base this on. The map in Farthest North is problematic, because geographic knowledge of the archipelago was then very limited; the map shows islands that don't exist and wrong shapes for islands that do. I'm sure I'll find something to work on. Any help you can give will be much appreciated, but please consider my co-nom suggestion. Brianboulton (talk) 20:58, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

New article. Suggestions? - Denimadept (talk) 02:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

FYI and and here. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

When are you going to work on Black Hawk War and file it for FAC? — Rlevse • Talk • 20:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The changes are looking pretty good at Upper Pine Bottom State Park. Dincher (talk) 00:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

You are correct. The new "source" looks very familiar. Will we have to mention this at GAN? It could look like we swiped from them instead of them swiping from the wiki? I am glad they used it and one of my goals in writing all these state parkicles is to improve the articles on the DCNR website. I agree, no need for maps at the Bottom or the View. Dincher (talk) 02:27, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you noticed that I added a preliminary subsection on references to the Signpost Dispatch here a few days ago. It's probably too long and might include unnecessary detail about ref templates, for example. I'm an endless reviser of my own words, rarely perfectly satisfied, so whack away at what I've done. I mean to have a go at the images and prose sections when the mood strikes me. The guidelines, MoS and others, change subtly with time, and it's not completely easy to keep up. It appears, for example, that FAC reviewers no longer favor using thumbs for most images but have become more open to size variety and, in some cases, images that overlap two sections, as in Stanley Green, promoted yesterday. Likewise, the strong insistence on nbsps for constructions like 10 elephants seems to have evaporated over the past 12 months. I'm thinking about these things as I try to imagine what to say to PR nominators and how to generalize for the Dispatch paragraphs.

Other thoughts: (1) I was sorry to see Aliso Creek (Orange County) come up short, but it's better than before, and it has a good chance of eventually making FA. (2) I bought a Nikon D-90 in hopes of improving my Wikipedia images. So far, I'm pretty clumsy with it and its many mysterious buttons, menus, and instructions, and I have to use it a lot more to figure out what it's best at and what it won't do. Since my 990 is much better with macros and I'm so used to it, I think I'll go on all future photoshoots with two cameras, one hanging around my neck and one hanging from my belt. I'm heading to Tryon Creek again tomorrow with the cameras; I want some better images before seeking a PR. Finetooth (talk) 18:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Since you suggested we add the video, I thought you might know some people who edit these things. At the FAC, we have been requested to edit it down. Do you know anyone who can do it? Torsodog said he would, a few days ago, but has not done so. I don't know if he is having trouble figuring out how to do it or what.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:39, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for passing by Crown Fountain. It is a four week old nom, so if you have an opinion on the FAC you might want to voice it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:28, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the support and the continued interest in improving the article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Ruhrfisch, I hope you're well. Since you know your way around articles dedicated to US national parks, I was wondering if you had any interest in reviewing something off the beaten path; The Leopold Report was a rather important document in its time as far as the NPS goes, and its echo is still felt today. It's a new sort of article for me (not a bio!), and I was hoping to bring it to FAC sometime in the near future. Finetooth has already given some great comments at the PR, but if you have a chance, I would love to hear what you think of it. I know you're terribly busy, but I thought I'd try my luck just in case. :) Thanks, María (habla conmigo) 16:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Haha, I suppose the title is a little misleading, but the only other choice, "Wildlife Management in the National Parks", puts me to sleep. Take your time, no rush, and I'd love to return the favor; just let me know when and where. María (habla conmigo) 12:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

As you requested: FAC is now live. Thanks again for your great suggestions! María (habla conmigo) 23:46, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow! You noticed that new article within minutes of my posting! Going from streams to bridges is a matter of "one thing leads to another", I think. The Howe-truss bridges in Oregon are a bit squat and appear to have been mass-produced by Sears, but they are cute nonetheless. :-) Finetooth (talk) 04:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

The other thing I did today was to return to Tryon Creek for more photos. After adding images and new alt text and moving things around a bit, I've listed the article at PR. If you find time to comment, I'd really appreciate it. Finetooth (talk) 04:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the helpful suggestions at PR. I will look into these things over the coming week or so and make improvements. You are right in noticing something odd about the mileage, and I think it may be that not all of the headwaters show up. Not sure. Thanks for catching this and the other things. Finetooth (talk) 18:36, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the review. I think I've fixed just about everything you've suggested. If you have time (I understand if you don't) I'd appreciate it if you could look at the article one more time before I nominate it at FAC if you think it is ready. Thanks again, LittleMountain5 01:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, a couple of months ago you were very helpful with a map of the Indian Ocean and was wondering if you would mind tinkering with another map for me for the article Action of 26 July 1806. In this case the image in question is File:Sulawesi blank map.svg, in which the brown lines mark modern provinces and are therefore anachronistic in a map in an article on a 19th century battle. Therefore I was wondering if you can create a new file with a map of the island without the brown lines for use in the above article. A second possibility, although it may be more difficult, is a map of the South-East Asian region without any political boundaries marked. This would be preferable as I can use it on a number of upcoming articles, but I haven't found one anywhere that is suitable for this purpose. If you have any idea where to can locate one that may be more suitable (a bit like File:Indonesia provinces blank map.svg, but without any brown province markings and all the land masses the same colour.) If either of these are possible/available I would be grateful, although if not I fully understand. As always, if you have anything that I can help with (reviews etc.) please don't hesitate to ask (at anytime, not just when I ask for favours!). Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:35, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Whenever is good for you, it isn't urgent. Thanks very much!--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:30, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I'm planning on sending Pennsylvania State Capitol to peer review. It looks liked you were getting swamped with requests, but I wanted to see if you would like to take a look at it. The PR is not up yet, but should be soon. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 03:39, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. The only photos that I can think of that would probably be needed would be interior shots of the House or Senate Chambers, or a close-up of the statue on the dome. I could help with one of the map requests (the one involving SVG maps), as it would be easy to do with a vector editing program. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 05:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I've seen the inside of one of the chambers (probably the House), wasn't able to get a shot with the, then, film camera as the tour seemed somewhat rushed (might have been because it was a Sunday). Last time I was there, I stayed outside (and was focused on getting the panorama). Photos of the chambers aren't critical because, as you said, it's "decently illustrated already". I'd forgotten the statue was on the PA quarter (and I call myself a numismatist).

PS The PR is up. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 19:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Those photos aren't bad. They're good shots of the paintings. I've left some responses at the PR, but I've got to plan a trip to F&M to recheck one of the sources. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 03:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

"The Pennsylvania Capitol" is in the library here, so, I'll have to take look at that as well. I probably should mention in the article, as well, that after the fire and before the Cobb Capitol was completed, the legislature met at a nearby church. Also, now that I look closer at the photo of the Cobb Capitol in the article, the location of the Hartranft Monument also confirms the location of the Cobb Capitol to be on the Hills Capitol site. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 17:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I've finally taken care of your suggestions at the PR and the others you've mentioned in passing, if you would like to take a look. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 01:00, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going to bother with where the location of the capitols in relation to each other because I'm getting conflicting info. From photos we gather that Cobb Capitol was in same location as the Hills, but the PA Manual cryptically states that the Huston Capitol "would be centered exactly where the old Hills Capitol had sat, facing the Susquehanna River to the west with the axis of State Street bisecting its dome". Other than that everything is taken care of. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 18:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Well now I feel dumb ;-) Thanks for spotting that. I guess I'm used to having it automatically listed at PR. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 15:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if you've been able to give any more thought to my co-nom proposition. The article is being developed in a sandbox here, if you want to take a look. Apart from the two maps mentioned before, the Arctic Ocean map in the "Plan" section needs a line drawn on it. One way or another I'd be grateful for any help with these maps. I wonder if this map could form the basis for the Franz Josef Land part of the voyage, though it's cluttered with text, and it's in German? I'm sure I've seen a blank map of the archipelago somewhere, though I cant find it on Commons. Brianboulton (talk) 00:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

There was nothing on it, so that's why I deleted it. I moved the peer review over to the Military History review section, so I really don't need it at all. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Last year you were kind enough to give the article on Virginia a peer review, one of the ones we badly needed to improve the article after a failed FAC. One year later, we're back on FAC, and I was hoping that we could get you too again look over the article, and give your opinion on it for us, whether or not we've done what you suggested we needed to get it up there. Thanks!-- Patrick {_oѺ^∞} 16:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!-- Patrick {_oѺ^∞} 16:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and taken most of your suggestions and gone at the article. I hope you approve of the changes we've made. I've noted them as I've gone along on the FAC page. Thanks again!-- Patrick {_oѺ^∞} 03:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

More good ideas. Thanks again, I've implemented them. Good call with the Health touch ups, they look good. I hope you will consider supporting the article with all its improvements.-- Patrick {_oѺ^∞} 18:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to make sure I properly thanked you for your assistance in bringing the article to FA status. It was promoted right after you added your support, so thanks once again!-- Patrick {_oѺ^∞} 15:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Would you please peer review the article for FA criteria, like you once did for FA Vithoba? Thanks. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:13, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, how did you find the creek's length? I saw you cited it to a highway map, but it did not list distances. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 16:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Could you give me a cite for those maps? I can't just say USGS topo maps as my source. :) ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 00:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

That would be appreciated, thank you. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~

I was wondering, should I write about Ridley Creek from the confluence of the East Branch Ridley Creek and Northeast Branch Ridley Creek or considering the longer of these two branches as the main stem? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 16:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

You're invited to the
Wiki Takes Philadelphia
October 4, 2009
Time: 12 pm
Location: Drexel Quad (33rd and Market)
University City, Philadelphia

RSVP

(view/edit this template)

Wikipedia Takes Philadelphia is a photo scavenger hunt and free content photography contest to be held all around Philadelphia aimed at illustrating Wikipedia articles.

Scheduled for Sunday, October 4, 2009, the check-in location will be at the Drexel University quad (between Chestnut and Market, 33rd and 32nd) at noon, and the ending party and photo uploading (location to be announced) will be at 6 PM. To reach the Drexel quad, walk south from Market Street at 32nd Street into the campus.

Register your team here

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:28, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I got some good pics of other places too. Mont Alto was very nice. I swung by Caledonia State Park and got some pics of the Totem Pole Playhouse. The game was a major let down. I don't even want to think about it. I did notice that Whipple Dam, the Poes, Penn-Roosevlet and Reeds Gap are all fairly close to one another. Next time I'll try to stop by some of them. Dincher (talk) 02:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

We really are not that far from getting pics of all the parks. Have a good one. Dincher (talk) 03:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Is the pic of the Waterville bridge a picture of the bridge at Swatara State Park or in Lycoming County? Dincher (talk) 14:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I really like the color pic. Good work and good find. Enjoy the rest of your day! Dincher (talk) 16:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the stuff on commons. I have thought about it doing, but didn't get beyond the thought. And folks say, "It's the thought that counts." Dincher (talk) 21:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I found some more pics on Flickr. Laurel Summit State Park, Neshaminy State Park, Nolde Forest Environmental Education Center and Whipple Dam State Park all have pics now. My flickr finding skills have improved. Also there are some great black and white pics of Penn-Roosevelt that I hav asked if there is a color version of them. I would prefer color pics. Dincher (talk) 23:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Cool beans. We'll have to celebrate when we get pics for all 120 parks. Dincher (talk) 18:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I like the new source. I'll use it today to update the articles. Nice find. Dincher (talk) 17:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I was going to update them all, but there's a pretty big difference with Cherry Springs State Park. We have 106 acres and the new source says something around 87 acres. I think I am just going to leave them be for now. What do you think? Dincher (talk) 18:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind. I had forgotten that the airport was recently added to the park. Dincher (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Another thought. I think I am going to just leave these alone for now. 2007 wasn't all that long ago, but it's apparent parks have changed in size since or before. Clear Creek State Park is an example. I am just not sure how to decide which numbers to go with so will leave them alone for now. Dincher (talk) 18:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it makes more sense when a park grows to use the 2007 source. The only reason that I can think of for a park shrinking would be a transfer of land from state park to state forest so that the land could be easily (possibly) used for natural gas drilling. But that is pure speculation and I haven't read anything about this. I agree with you in the thought that we should use the new reference as a ref for the parks that don't already have the area clearly stated in the DCNR state park article. Have a good one. Off to the house in a matter of minutes. Dincher (talk) 22:57, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Time for the Steelers game. Dincher (talk) 00:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Look, I don't mean to sound brusque, but the last reviewer ravaged me because I relied too heavily on primary sources. Since I couldn't find any secondary sources, all I could do was remove the information. Since I cannot remove the information on Lieder, this is as good as it gets. So please, don't make me go through this again. Should I keep the information or should I ditch it? And if primary sources are all there are, should this article be deleted? Serendi^podous 07:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I bit your head off a little there. I'm under a lot of wikistress at the moment. Thanks for all your help and I'll take what you said seriously. Serendi^podous 19:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

		The entire world's gold supply
		Because you couldn't do any worse with it than has already been done. Serendipodous 20:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

There's a lot less of it than you might think. About 60 trailer-trucks' worth. Of course, the trailer trucks wouldn't be able to move anywhere, but that's a different issue. :-) Serendi^podous 22:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Just to keep you informed: I have moved the article to mainspace as Nansen's Fram expedition. The last few sections are still being written, and should be posted by the end of the week. The maps are incomplete: File:Arctic Ocean - en.png needs a line drawn on it, which can be simply done. File:nansen06ds.jpg will be the main chart for the article and has all the necessary information, but magnifying glasses are needed to interpret it. It needs replacing with something along the lines of File:Shackleton Endurance Aurora map2.png, which I believe was concoted by you and Finetooth when I was still in my Wikipedia cradle. I am in two minds as to whether the third map, of the Franz Josef Land archipelago, is really necessary.

Obviously I hope you will be able to take over the maps, but I do understand that you have lots to do and no doubt many prior commitments. My intended timescale is to take the article to peer review a week from now, and depending on how that goes, perhaps to FAC two weeks after that. Does this look like a timetable you could work within? There is of course some flexibility, and the maps need not be ready before the peer review, which will mainly be about the prose. Any help, up to and including co-nom, will be greatly appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 21:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. There is no source for the line to be drawn on the Arctic Ocean map, but it can be very simply described. It enters the Arctic Ocean through the Bering Strait at the top of the map. It swings to the right, towards the group of coastal islands level with the word "Arctic". These are the New Siberian Islands. The line then curves towards the North Pole, passes it and swings downward into the Atlantic, passing between Greenland and Iceland where it ends in an arrowpoint. The only labelling necessary, I think, will be "New Siberian Islands", "Greenland" and "Spitsbergen" as Svalbard was then called.

As to Franz Josef Land, I am still not sure whether a map is required for this part of the journey. The source map I have is from Farthest North, published in 1897 and showing a rather different configuration of islands (much of the archipelago was then unexplored). It is a large-scale fold-out map, quite difficult to scan, but can be done. Perhaps when you have read the article you can let me know whether you think this extra map will enhance it.

Meantime I am continuing with the article and hope the first draft will be ready by Friday. I will then try to cull approx. 1,000 words of excess verbiage before committing it to the trials of PR. Brianboulton (talk) 10:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Re latest version of Arctic Map: I have followed every instruction on WP:BYC relevant to Mozilla Firefox. My browser is unalterably wedded to the earlier version of the map - whatever I do, it ignores it. If I go to File:Nansen's Planned Drift Map.PNG I see the revised version, but if I try loading this to the article page, it's the older version. How is this possible? I've no idea what to do now - my expertise in these areas is non-existent. Any suggestions? Brianboulton (talk) 18:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, whatever you did worked! Meanwhile I have managed to photograph and upload File:NansenFranzJosefLandoldmap.jpg, which I have posted temporarily to the article. When the map is enlarged, the line of Nansen & Johansen's journey can be clearly seen. It should be possible to transpose this to a more accurately drawn modern map. Not all the islands or geographical points need to be named, but I would suggest that the following are:-

• Cape Fligely, at the top of the northernmost island
• Hvidtenland (where they first struck land)
• Frederick Jackson Island
• Northbrook Island
• Cape Flora

I still not completely convinced that this map isn't one too many, but at least we have the means to draw it now. I'll await your judgement on this. Brianboulton (talk) 20:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Please take the time you need over the remaining maps. I shall be occupied with the prose for at least a week, and the maps can be added/amended after. I also need to catch up with my PR/FAC review commitments. Most grateful for your help so far. Brianboulton (talk) 21:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:CHIFTD now has three FAs. I am hopeful for McDonald's Cycle Center, which is the next FAC I will make. I am also hopeful that you would get involved in another article because you made us such a great map that it would be really fitting for you to be a co-nom for the FA that puts us over the top in terms of going from GT to FT. Jay Pritzker Pavilion is at WP:PR. I guess I am hoping you get involved as more than a reviewer for this or another article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Any help you can give is fine. I am just saying we are trying to get over the hump and I thought you might want to be a part of the effort.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Can you make strikes at Wikipedia:Peer review/Jay Pritzker Pavilion/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Did you finish your strikes?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:45, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

	<font=3> Thank you so much for your help with Columbia River, which made featured article today. Finetooth (talk) 01:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, you recently said in my talkpage that the Azerbaijan article already had a peer-review, just wanted to add that I wasnt so sure about the procedures due to the lack of review, I had no negative intentions. Anyway I would like to ask you to please review the Azerbaijan article for FA criteria. Thank you. Neftchi (talk) 10:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I was waiting for Columbia River to finish before nominating Tryon Creek. I closed the PR and nominated for FA a few minutes ago. I don't know if you've looked at the article since you did the PR, but I think I've responded to your suggestions. The biggest surprise was my realization that the stream is not seven miles long, as some sources (perhaps parroting one another) suggest. I'd been uneasy about how so much length could be squashed into the upper reaches. When you questioned the numbers, I realized that eliminating the headwaters tribs from the count (an estimate rather than a precise measure) would make sense of the math. I doubt, by the way, that Columbia River would be FA without your consistent help over a year or more. Finetooth (talk) 17:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

No hurry and no pressure. I'm happy to say that I agree with you about the footnote, and I added one during the PR. It's citation 7. I hope it's clear and in the right place. Perhaps I should add it to the lead rather than the Course section, but it's nice to keep the lead uncluttered. Finetooth (talk) 21:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I need some guidance. I have a question. Lately, when I upload photos to Wikimedia Commons the way that Spinning Spark told me to do mantually on my talk page, it works, but now each time, I get notices that the information must be uploaded directly from Flickr, or, by email with an ORTIS account or a TUSC one, (which I applied for twice -- see below my photo gallery on my user page [1] --they give me a number and I have NO CLUE what it is for; how to use it. Thus all my manual uploads are repeated by some Commons/Flickr bot, and when I find new photos from photographers and say, all they need do is to click on the photo in Wikipedia, and their link back to their photostream and name will be there-- it isn't quite the same. I got a warning from someone there to start uploading stuff directly from Flickr, (I used to do that, I used the Bryan Flickr upload tool, which broke down a few months ago). I know zip about computers. I'd do it the right way if I could figure out how. Also, one of the photographers who has allowed us use of photos she was about to sell to a book on the Rolling Stones, vintage ones, but shared them with us instead, and yesterday emailed me a message with an attached new photo(much better than what we have now in Mick Taylor's infobox, and more recent. I want to use it, but how do I prove it is SA-BY Creative Commons? Can I forward YOU with the message from her and the attached photo?Would that work? Or must I ask her to post it in Flickr and have all the issues probably with this one too? If you want to see an example of my mistakes, see here: [2]

Also I find it frustratijng to upload photos for which there is no category, like with the Allman Brothers Band, theres no Allman Brothers category, no Southern rock, no Surf music, no Session musicians, No Glam Rock categories, etc. How can they be created? I'm so sick of all rhese changes in Wikimedia policy, when I can't even get help with the basics. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 19:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, I am now really puzzled. I uploaded two new photos of Mick Taylor to Commons. Both times, since I upload it manually, it asks for Category, and I chose Rolling Stones, John Mayall, and Guitarists from the United Kingdom. It still has a tag on it saying that it's not categorized, but I looked up the Rolling Stones' category, and both photos were there! WTH? This is what really annoys me. Plus, the new black and white photo of Keith Richards which I uploaded to the categories of: Rolling Stones, Keith Richards, and guitarits from English complete is now only in Rolling Stones, and I can't figure out how to move the freaking image from just the Rolling Stones to the Category: Keith Richards! This is my complaint all along. I click edit, and just find more categories, but not a way to move the stinking image elsewhere. I HATE COMMONS! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 18:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ruhrfisch!

Well, I really think that the article 2003 Afro-Asian Games needs some attention. Do you think it is now ready to reach B-class yet? If so, please do the honors of changing the class in the talk page. If there are any improvements you suggest, plz do so.

Yours,

Ankitbhatt (talk) 08:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi again Ruhrfisch! This is me Ankit.

I looked into whatever you pointed out to me, and I have tried to clear my article of all unnecessities. What do you think now? Is it ready for B-class?

Ankitbhatt (talk) 11:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ruhrfisch- If you could have a look at some edits, I would be interested to see if they fall under Harassment. The anonymous Special:Contributions/71.64.103.117 (read some of the edit summaries on his contributions page) put this‎ on my talk page and the same thing on my user page. He also put the same thing on the talk page for User:JeffBillman. Further, he placed "refimprove" tags on several sections of two pages I have edited extensively, Kent, Ohio and Theodore Roosevelt High School (Kent, Ohio) despite both of them being pretty well-sourced. If anything, these fall under WP:PA. --JonRidinger (talk) 17:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! You should also know this user likely has used multiple user names, most of which can be found in the edit history of the Stow-Munroe Falls High School article, but also in the Stow, Ohio and Munroe Falls, Ohio articles. They were involved in the small edit war on the Munroe Falls article about a month ago that resulted in the article being placed in protection. The reasons I am fairly sure all (there are almost 10 if I remember right) are the same are because almost all are related to and have almost exclusively edited articles about Stow and Munroe Falls, Ohio (or articles with connections to them) and will blank their respective talk page after anyone posts something there and blank their respective user page. I don't think he's used them as sockpuppets, but did use them in the Munroe Falls dispute to get around 3RR. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Alternate usernames I can find include: User:SMFBulldog1, User:Bullldaugdog2, User:Bulldawgldog2, User:Bu11dawgdoq2, User:Bullldowgdog2, User:Bullldawgdog2, User:Bulldogdog2, User:Bulldogdawg2, User:Poenam dare44, User:Batcountry13, User:Munroe Falls photographer, User:Stow photographer, User:SMFHS photographer 1, and User:Smfhs photographer. As far as I know these are in reverse order starting with the most recent. He/She has never tried to act like two or more people, however, but has used them as I mentioned to get around 3RR. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for helping here! Jeff and Jon asked me for help, but you got in first; as I told them, I would be more inclined to block, but I suppose it can't hurt to give a final warning and block immediately if anything else happens. Nyttend (talk) 00:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

He did it again and this time posted it on your talk page as well. Apparently, anyone who helps me must also be Mormon? Sorry to drag you into this nonsense. --JonRidinger (talk) 03:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. You can add User:MaroonGoldSpike1 to the list of user names of the anonymous User:71.64.103.117. --JonRidinger (talk) 19:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...you can also add User:3227Egraham to the list...it is definitely the same person. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:11, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed this article (for the second time), how interesting the cultural aspect of the stream is, how it fits in with a lot that you do, and how it could be greatly improved. It also led to List of National Natural Landmarks in Pennsylvania. Just a heads up in case you're interested in it. BTW - I have every intention of getting back to Brandywine Creek (Christina River), but I'm constantly finding myself distracted. Smallbones (talk) 23:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the peer review on Aniru Conteh. I hope to implement your changes in the next few days. I wish I could say the same about your review of Jonestown, but unfortunately I was run out of that article by some very angry editors. Viriditas (talk) 08:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Did you find Pump Station in person or on a map? Is there anything in Pump Station? This is our last week of fall break from school and I am spending most of it working at Penney's. The plans for sending Upper Pine Bottom to PR sound pretty good to me. Have a good day. Dincher (talk) 13:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like you might find some trees, rocks and maybe a cabin if you're lucky. Dincher (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Found as possible jackpot here for PA state park pics. I sent you an email with more detail. Dincher (talk) 01:54, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

He went to all of them in one summer. And it looks like with two really bid dogs too! Dincher (talk) 02:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Any luck on the PA State Parks photos? Dincher (talk) 18:29, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I will when I get home, thanks. Dincher (talk) 19:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll point you in the right direction when I get home. Dincher (talk) 19:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I can't check it now, but I bet you're on the right track. Don't worry about feeling dumb, it happens to us all. ;) Dincher (talk) 19:20, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I think he only goes on flickr once a day. Hopefully it will all work out! Dincher (talk) 14:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smfhs photographer. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 20:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

To let you know how things are at present: I have finished the prose except for tinkering. The article has been quite well received by members of Project Norway (see article talkpage). I am thinking of taking it to peer review in the next day or so, to get some wider comment on the text. The maps are not essential for this exercise, and I imagine you are exceedingly busy at the moment, but can you update me on your plans in this respect? Brianboulton (talk) 21:04, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Both the Franz Josef Land maps look good; I suppose it might be easier to put the required names on the PNG version, and that would just about be my preference. Whatever is least problem for you, basically. Brianboulton (talk) 21:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm planning on adding section between the graft scandal and the restoration sections detailing Brunner's plan, but am having trouble finding sources on it. I can easily rattle off the structures that were built as part of the plan, but that's no good without a source. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 02:01, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I found a source that was used in the form that details Brunner's plan well and started adding it into the article. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 01:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

The map is excellent - thanks. I agree that the legend you suggest should be added to the topleft corner. Would it be possible to include a scale with this? Also, I think the journey line should have a directional arrow (near the top, perhaps,) in case anyone gets confused.

Could "Winter quarters" be identified by a marked dot on Frederick Jackson Island? And would it be possible to add latitude lines? 80°N runs through Northbrook Island; 82° is very slightly to the north of Cape Fligely.

Nansen's book includes a copy of the "Payer" map of Franz Josef Land, the map that Nansen had to guide him. It bears no geographical relationship to the real map, so no wonder Nansen was confused. I am wondering whether to include this map, but there would be a risk of clutter (also it does not scan very clearly). Any thoughts? The map is on File: Payer map Franz Josef Land 1874.jpg. Brianboulton (talk) 11:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the labels do need to be quite a bit larger. Even on 300px they are hardly legible. Brianboulton (talk) 12:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

...and if it's no problem, let's have the 81° line. Brianboulton (talk) 15:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Latest outline (with latitude lines, minus labels) is fine. Brianboulton (talk) 16:54, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

It looks great, thanks again. Only thing missing is a directional arrow. One thing, though. If I click on the map the image that comes up is the old one, minus legend, minus latitude lines etc. Is this the old "refresh" problem, and do I have to do anything about it? Brianboulton (talk) 18:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

All refresh issues resolved without action on my part. The map sits very well in the article. We have to decide whether to use the Payer map. One possibility would be to locate it where your Franz Josef Land map is at the moment and move yours down to where the winter quarter depiction now is, losing that slightly unsatisfacory image. Alternatively we don't have to use the Payer map. For consideration. Brianboulton (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Heya. I have map woes. I had a map in St. Johns River that was released by the St. Johns River Water Management District (here, page 4). Then it wasn't. I may not be able to use it. But I should provide a map showing their designated basins at least. It looks technical to do. I'm not asking for you to do it (unless it's so easy you could whip it up in 5 minutes). But maybe you might have some ideas. I, uh, could draw it. Using colored pencils...I'm embarrassed to even post that... Help. --Moni3 (talk) 17:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

This is just to say that I have sent the article to WP:PR, with a caveat that the maps are still receiving attention. Brianboulton (talk) 20:39, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Any one of the three methods you describe could do, although there would be some possible issues for some.

• User changes license of the images: could be tedious for him, but this would assure the Flickr bot would approve if another image is uploaded.
• User sends in OTRS: if the photos are contained in a Set, then this would be the best option, since he would only have to state that the photos in that set (with the Set's link) are licensed as such. If they are not in a Set, then it might be problematic as the locations of the photos to be uploaded have to be stated in the email. Declaring all of his photos in his account as licensed might bring other unintended problems, such as unintentionally putting personal photos under the license. A restriction, such as stating "only photos of the Park", might be hard to discern if he has photos of other parks in this path. The OTRS option is best if the user has categorised the photos of the park in a Set.
• Stating the licensing in his Flickr profile: if he has photos of other parks under his flickr name, this might cause some confusion. Furthermore, users/reviewers have to go to the user's profile to verify the license (which might not be obvious).

Overall, go for the OTRS if the photos are in a Set. If not, changing the license on Flickr is best, although it would be a burden on the user. Jappalang (talk) 04:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

In article text: "...but they achieved a record Farthest North latitude of 86°13.6'N before a long retreat over ice and water..." doesn't appear to jive with image caption, if I'm reading it right. Just FYI. - Hordaland (talk) 03:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for archiving the Goya PR, I wasn't sure how to go about it myself. Your comments and suggestions there were very helpful, I think we took in most of them. T'was good. Ceoil (talk) 13:37, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Im not sure if you remember, but this is not the first time you have helped me. Always appreciated. Ceoil (talk) 13:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and nominated The Pennsylvania Society for GA, and I am wondering if you could take a look at it and let me know what I could expect from that process. I think it's pretty good, myself, and I'd like to know what an admin thinks. --Blargh29 (talk) 00:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

• • Thanks! I think I dealt with all of your preliminary suggestions. By the way, how much effort would be required to get this article up to FA? Would that require a full rewrite? I can't think of anything else that could reasonably be added to the article. I think I covered everything.--Blargh29 (talk) 04:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

• • • Wow, that book is great! There are about 30 overall in Google Books. Between that and all of the NY Times material, there might be too much for me to sift through to get to FA in my lifetime. There are some really cool line drawings, including some Pennsylvania State Capitol related pictures. Those might be worth your while to sift through for that article's FAC.--Blargh29 (talk) 05:22, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

	<font=3> Thank you so much for your help with Tryon Creek, which made featured article yesterday. Finetooth (talk) 02:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I can try to convert those maps to SVGs. I have one up at File:Nansen's Planned Drift map.svg but there is an error in it, somewhere, and am having experts at Commons look at it. Will try to do the others. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 20:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The "Drift" map was fixed and is finished, so is the Franz Josef Land map. By the way I closed the PR and sent PA Capitol to FAC. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 01:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, let me know how it goes with Inkscape. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 16:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

My inital thought is that you need to convert all the objects (text especially) into paths (its the first option in Inkscape under the Path menu) because the wiki software renders vectors slightly different than Inkscape. Did you use the trace feature? I believe the original PNG wasn't deleted and is under the vector. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 16:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Online, its blank (with the little box with a X indicated an error), but I was able to download it and see it just fine in Inkscape. You should be able to resize it (I note everything is grouped, so it makes it easier) by clicking the image in Inkcape and dragging the arrows. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 16:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, glad it was able to be fixed. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 17:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Try this (it's also linked in Inkscape under Help > Inkscape Manual) and WP:INK. Good luck! ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 19:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

It takes some getting used, as it is fundamentally different from things like MS Paint, but should get easier with practice. By the way, a tip for the Indoneasia map (as it had me stumped for awhile), you need to bring up the Layers taskpane (SHIFT-CTRL-L or the last option in the Layers menu) and unlock the layers by clicking the padlock icons. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 20:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I doubt I'd be able to do the same with programs like Paint. I've also started fixing things at the FAC. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 01:04, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Technically 30 if you count the Genius of State also. Do you suppose there is way to do the ref separately (or at least with a letter instead of a number), similar to how it was done in your Forksville Covered Bridge article? ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 03:07, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thanks for adding that in. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 03:44, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Done! Changing colors of objects is best done with "Fill and Stroke" (SHIFT-CTRL-F). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 23:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/McDonald's Cycle Center/archive2 is now open.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Would you care to render an opinion on the topic regarding costs that is at issue.

Over a week ago you said "So the question is how well are the prices sourced, and is there a justified reason for their mention.", You have yet to state your opinion on this issue.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I came across some very nice images of Bald Eagle State Park and uploaded them to the commons and added them to the article. Feel free to tweak any captions. I am guessing that most of them were taken along Skyline Drive Trail. All I can think of is that tree would make a great place to take a nap! Dincher (talk) 00:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I slipped it in the lumber section. It would look better with an expanded lumber section. Dincher (talk) 02:21, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

This is to let you know I shall be away from home for a few days, returning Monday. I will have some limited online access, and should be able to maintain the PR backlog, but probably not a lot else. On the Nansen article I think we are pretty well complete. The only thing I notice is that the main map is still png. I am still hoping that more comments will come from the peer review, but that cannot be guaranteed. In any event, I think that the article probably meets the FA criteria.

If you agree, then if nothing else substantial arises from the PR process I will nominate this for FAC on my return, either on Monday 19th or Tuesday 20th, with you as co-nom. I think your mapping contributions more than justify this. During the FAC process I will of course take the flak concerning content and prose issues. If you disagree with this proposed schedule, please let me know. Brianboulton (talk) 23:23, 14 October 2009 (UTC)the

• I've just noticed that the svg version of the Franz Josef Land map does not have latitude lines. I rather think we need these, otherwise there is no indication of the islands' location. Can they be restored? Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou very much for the map! As for the other map you are working on, what you suggest sounds fine, I leave it in your hands. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow! That is fantastic! Thankyou very much.--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Ruhrfisch - you did a peer review on this article back in June. Could you look it over again? In prep for a GA nom? I think almost all of your points have been addressed - the images were thumbed/moved, the lead expanded. Re its reception outside the US, I've looked in a lot of places and haven't found any sources. Sincerely, Novickas (talk) 12:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. M.K. and I did some adjustments today. I'll be gone for a day or two, but I think progress has been made :) Novickas (talk) 23:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed your reply at Novickas user page, I think it is very good idea to convert your comments into GA review, indeed. It will save time, waiting for another review. Thanks, M.K. (talk) 08:02, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Will wait next pair of eyes, hopefully it wouldn't take too long to wait. M.K. (talk) 09:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

On side note, do you think that article has chances to getting FA status? M.K. (talk) 08:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I think the "street" picture would be really good for the Pennsylvania Route 405 article. I will also add one of them to Hughesville, but I like the fair pic best for the infobox. Dincher (talk) 15:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I passed your message along to Mitch. Dincher (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the Buckeyes. I've found a state park project, I am fixing the dabs. And watching the Penn State game on a video broadcast of WNEP. It's nice to see something very familiar. Dincher (talk) 21:18, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

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

Hi Ruhrfisch. I noticed recently that Columbia River became a FA. It would be nice if the Snake River article could also be lifted to GA or FA, as it is the most important tributary. I have some things prepared at sandbox 2, it would be appreciated if you could help decide which sections and references could be placed on the Snake River article. Thanks, Shannon^talk _contribs ^sign!_:) 02:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

A few months ago, I told you that I was considering starting a Politics and Government workgroup within the Wikiproject Pennsylvania. Just a heads up-- I just took the first step: Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania/Politics and Government. Thanks for all your help on this stuff.--Blargh29 (talk) 04:05, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Now nominated at FAC with you as co-nom. Could you check the nom page to see that I have entered the co-nom correctly? Brianboulton (talk) 18:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

(Later): Can you work out why there is no FAC link on the article's talkpage? I merely followed the procedure! Brianboulton (talk) 18:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

(((even later) Scratch that, the link is there. Brianboulton (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I left a note on Cngodles's talk page about the flickr pics. I note that your note was the first message he was sent since 2007 and that he hasn't edited here since June or July of 2009. Have you tried again on his flickr page? Dincher (talk) 01:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

My vote goes for boldness. Dincher (talk) 02:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Cool. The UPBSP edits were off the top of my head, I am sure there is more. Dincher (talk) 02:35, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much. They both look good, so much so that it's hard to choose between them. Looks like you were out on a perfect fall day. Finetooth (talk) 01:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Saw the rest this morning and installed four (Durrwachter, Carillon, Hanna Park, and LH Hospital, into the LH article, now illustrated mainly by you. The page looks much better to me now. For a long time, the lower sections were a kind of image desert. I also enjoyed seeing the waterfalls and the HR State Park panorama. Thanks once again. Finetooth (talk) 17:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for being one of the many hands that helped raise Crown Fountain from WP:GA to WP:FA status.

This user helped promote Crown Fountain to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I just realised that I'd apologized to two other people on their talk page for just losing it when you were all trying to help me understand Commons, but your apology was part of a discussion on my talk page and never made it here, and I am so sorry for that. I've had some weirdness going on emotionally, and I'm (obviously) not the quickest learner! Please forgive my insanity. You will find, (if you have the time) how bad I felt about my kneejerk reaction to not understanding things. I think Spinningspark figured out my ADD issues early on, and you can even see his careful numbered steps to doing anything new on my talk page (and I was always certain I'd never "get it", but, I eventually would), and hopefully you'll find I'm grateful to my teachers here.

I do have a couple of new questions. The first has to do with duplicates of photos I uploaded by accident (esp. when I was using the "Bryan Flickr upload bot"- which I believe doesn't work anymore and was really slow sometimes). I'd either forget I uploaded the photo already, or it would take so long, I'd think I didn't do it right. Either way, I found there's some template on Wikimedia Commons to delete photos, but I don't really understand how to apply it to a photo. A great example is Jeff Martin. I uploaded to Commons the exact same photo twice. Here's the location of the second one: [3]. I need to know how to delete such dumb errors. The only difference between the two photos is the first has the same name in Commons without the digit "2" in it. I really don't want to leave a trail of destruction everywhere I go through Commons, but the help desk there seems to be self-help of which I'm seemingly incapable. Can you write the steps for me just to delete my own uploaded duplicate images?? I'd be so thankful. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 00:10, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow reply, been somewhat busy. I thinking of also mentioning the flags being in the Hills Capitol. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 15:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your useful comments on the lion and sun article. As you said, the article needs serious copy editing. The problem is that the most contributors on this article speak English as the second or the third language. I do not know any native speaker editor who is interested in spending his time on copy editing the article. Is there any project in Wikipedia who are willing to help out for copy editing.--WIMYV? (talk) 17:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

The article looks great. I think it should be fine. Better the Dodgers lose than the Steelers or Penn State. You can't win them all. (Not that I have to tell a Cleveland fan something like that) ;) Dincher (talk) 20:52, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

This the work that never ends, it just goes on and on my fried, somebody started doing it not knowing what it was and they'll continue doing it forever just because. and so on. Dincher (talk) 23:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I will give it a link check tomorrow night at work. Dincher (talk) 02:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

While checking the links I cam across a sentence in the Geology and Climate section that throws me off. It's the sentence about the Millstones being carved from the exposed rock. Maybe move this to the history section or give more detail if possible. Dincher (talk) 23:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Adding on right here so you don't miss the above comment. I did a link check and didn't see too many overlinks, made a few changes which I noted in the edit summaries. I will now make sure all the links go where they should go and are what we need them to be. Dincher (talk) 23:18, 23 October 2009 (UTC) All the links look good to me. I made a few minor changes which are summarized in the edit summary. I think it's ready. Dincher (talk) 00:40, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem with waiting from here. Dincher (talk) 01:00, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Did you get my latest flickr mail about the Ricketts Glen pics. The pics from Dougtone are free. Dincher (talk) 01:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I am finished for the night with addressing PR comments. They're all yours, all of them are very helpful. Dincher (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on Grandfather Mountain State Park. It's fixed now. Now we need to find which foxes are at the foxes in the UPBSP area. The capitalization of animals names is one of the more frustrating parts of this project. To me it makes no sense to capitalize any animals name, but I guess I'm wrong. Glad to here the Nansen article made FA, congrats. Headed to bed eary tonight. Have a good one. Dincher (talk) 00:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC) So tired I missed the last sentence. Yes, FAC tomorrow! Dincher (talk) 00:03, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Ready for FAC! Dincher (talk) 21:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, you can open it. Regarding Grandfather Mountain State Park. The edit summary should have said Grandfather Mountain is now a state park. Spelling errors! Dincher (talk) 21:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Several of the items have been addressed. If you have further comments, including what to do about the spinoff table, ie a proposal for a second timeline has been made, please do so. Thanks.陣内_Jinnai 05:45, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Just reminding you again of the Shenandoah peer review. It's been 15 hours since you posted a  Doing... on it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:44, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

• Okay, I addressed your concerns. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:47, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

• Do you think the website archive is sufficient for the personnel changes? That's literally the only source I could find. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

• I had a subscription to Country Weekly back then (heck, I wrote the article on that mag!) but I don't remember ever having that issue, otherwise I'd cite it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:43, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your helpful comments on the peer review for the article Wonder World Tour. One thing, what exactly did you mean by "Watch logical organization - the strep throat incidents are tacked on at the end under the headings Additional notes and should be incorporated into the actual article - this is what Brianboulton was talking about above."?

Oh, thank you for explaining. So where do you suggest that material should go as of now? -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 22:31, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. What would be the name? -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 03:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

As the FAC review seems to have paused, it may be a good time for us to consider whether or not to revert to the former positionings of the main map and the Fram picture, as one reviewer has suggested. Shall we give it a try (might promote a bit of interest)? Brianboulton (talk) 17:34, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Me and Truthkeeper88 are discussing your very helpful suggestions here at my talkpage. Thanx and I would like you to respond there. ATC ^{. Talk} 18:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Haystacks1 Loyalsock Creek Sullivan Co PA.jpg great new pic of Loyalsock Creek here in Sullivan County. According to the Sullivan County article the "Haystacks" are south of Dushore. South of Dushore is Cherry Township. Do you know if the haystacks are in Cherry Township? If not could you look at a map for me? I am at work and can't see the great PennDot maps. Dincher (talk) 18:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, I was hoping to add the pic to Cherry Twp. Laporte Twp. already has a great pic. Dincher (talk) 20:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll have to look at it at home. Can't access commons at work. It's fine with me if you go ahead and add it to wikipedia, then I'll be able to see it. Dincher (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the pic of the park HQ and the statue. I agree the statue is a place holder. Dincher (talk) 23:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

See FAC page: can you help? I am a duffer when it comes to images. Having scanned all these from Nansen's 1897 book I didn't anticipate problems, but there you go. Brianboulton (talk) 12:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Re your comment on the FAC page: Nansen's book can't have been published in US or Norway in 1893, as the expedition took place 1893-96 and the book wasn't written until 1896-97. Brianboulton (talk) 15:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey Ruhrfisch- When you get a chance, please check out the edit history and talk page at Darrell K Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium‎. We do have one user, User:Longhorn00 who has already made 4 reversions by adding a "fact" he feels that is "interesting" and important but is merely trivia and is unsourced and misleading to say the least. Any help or insight you could provide would be greatly appreciated, but he definitely needs a WP:3RR. Thanks! --JonRidinger (talk) 00:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...it's not even 7th...it's "7th largest listed record crowd", which is why I have removed it since it isn't sourced and is trivial and misleading. In other words, it is the 7th highest attendance record compared with other stadiums' top attendance records. When you sort all the attendance records for each stadium, it comes in 7th on the List of NCAA Division I FBS football stadiums. It is nowhere near the 7th largest crowd to ever see a college football game since the top 10 crowds for several other stadiums are all bigger. So much effort for something so meaningless IMO. --JonRidinger (talk) 01:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I did a GA sweeps review of the article Johnny Appleseed a few months ago, and you asked for an extension on the hold to improve the article. I can't see that anything significant has been done, so I'm gonna delist it now. Please let me know if you make the improvements in the future, and I'll do a new review. Lampman (talk) 16:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

can you review Family Guy and lisa simpsons peer review.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 23:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for the offer of photos! I've avoided using pics of the Berlin Wall because that was a separate border system. I think the ones from the Hessian-Thuringian border would be most relevant. Could you describe these pics? I'm primarily interested in anything you might have from the period after the border was abandoned, since we don't really have anything to illustrate that at the moment. -- ChrisO (talk) 18:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on the Nansen's Fram expedition making FA ! (Ice Explorer (talk) 20:06, 28 October 2009 (UTC))

Congrats from me too. I somehow missed that this had gone to FAC. I just finished reading the article, which is wonderfully well-done. Your map of the voyage is super. It would have been tempting to approximate the travel paths with a series of straight lines instead of the actual incredible meandering. The meanders are much more impressive. Finetooth (talk) 01:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks once again - I will take all this on board asap. I'm a bit stretched at present. Ben MacDui 09:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

This is embarrassing, but I need a couple of image files deleted. The first is File: Santi Giovanni e Paulo Venice.jpg, where I uploaded the image upside down. When I realised this I re-uploaded the image as File:SS Giovanni e Paolo 1654.jpg (note different Paolo spelling). However, it then came to my notice that my source was in error and had mislabelled the drawing which does not relate to the Teatro Santi Giovanni e Paolo at all. I have uploaded a new file with the correct image on it, but I need someone to get rid of the embarrassing wrong images, preferably fast, and I don't know how to do it. Ah well-a-day, what evil looks had I from old and young... Brianboulton (talk) 22:38, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Nice work. Is it the same size as before? Should it be? Are you going to just swap it out at other articles or is it going to be considered for placement in new locations in the articles? Especially, should it be move up in the BP Bridge article now?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:29, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

It looks fine. What if the font was larger on the original then maybe you could go to a more standard 300 px. How difficult would font size changes be?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:53, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

O.K. I will be offline for next four hours.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I am not on my usual computer today and the settings are unusual where I am. However, I would guess we could go with 300 everywhere without much objection with the 14 point version. I will look more closely later today (possibly tomorrow UTC-time).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:10, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I've opened the discussion on NRHP photos at Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#NRHP_nomination_photos and hope that you'll comment there. Smallbones (talk) 16:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Seeing your comment on this discussion about the now-demolished stone bridge makes me wonder: do you have a complete list of the bridge photos for which permission has been given? I'd like to help with these uploads :-) Nyttend (talk) 22:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)