User talk:Farragutful/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Co-Cathedral Our Lady of Guadalupe - Anchorage, AK

I just read about this tonight. I'll see about getting an image. Roberto221 (talk) 04:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I had not seen this, but it appears to be true. Good work. Farragutful (talk) 12:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Oakdale Memorial Gardens

Hi there. I was just wondering if you had happened across this article about Oakdale's NRHP listing: Beyond the grave: Honoring our Quad City cemetery history

I thought you might find it interesting. Dustin C. Oliver (talk) 04:58, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I did. I added a little more to the Oakdale article and referenced it. It was a good article. Farragutful (talk) 14:52, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Greetings. I just wanted to let you know that a PDF of the full NRHP nomination has been posted on the Register's website: Oakdale Cemetery Historic District Dustin C. Oliver (talk) 04:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick. It has been taking them longer to upload them. I'll have to check out your good work. Thanks for letting me know. Farragutful (talk) 04:44, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

I did nudge them a bit by way of a message to the NRHP Facebook page. Dustin C. Oliver (talk) 05:46, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Oakdale was designated a local landmark on the Davenport Register of Historic Properties in November. I just now got around to adding that info to the Oakdale article. I got tired of waiting for the Historic Preservation Commission to update the official list, so I referenced the council minutes for the designation. Dustin C. Oliver (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

I didn't see any mention of that in the Times, but I don't monitor the Register as closely as I could either--not that it would make any difference. The city is very slow at updating the official list, and why that is I cannot tell you. I'm sure its not a priority, but how much time could it take? Thanks for all your work. Farragutful (talk) 12:51, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

New Project

I added the Coat of Arms of the current Archbishops/Bishops to the "List of Catholic bishops of the United States" wiki page. I'm helping User:SajoR out with collecting the rest. Roberto221 (talk) 05:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Re: Catholic Lists

You mean like what I've done to other pages(just to name a few):

• "List of Major League Baseball stadiums"
• "List of NCAA Division I basketball arenas"
• "List of National Hockey League arenas"
• "List of college bowl games"

Roberto221 (talk) 15:39, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. I think its a cleaner and a more user friendly page. Farragutful (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Lists

I've done that for about 10 different pages throughout the years, and I agree, it does look cleaner in addition to the pages being shorter. We can come up with a plan on what data to include, what to make sortable(images don't sort). With some editing, the tables can be transferred from one page to another easily. Roberto221 (talk) 21:40, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

List of Catholic bishops of the United States

Check out the updated page. Roberto221 (talk) 09:08, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edward C. Malesic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diocese of Harrisburg. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:49, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Deleting Cathedral pics

There's a user/editor who's deleting Cathedral pics from the pages. So far he's deleted "Saint John the Baptist Cathedral - Fresno" and "Cathedral of Our Lady of Perpetual Help - Rapid City, SD". He goes by the name "User:Natuur12". I've saved the OTRS ticket #'s from the other pics I've uploaded for reference. You encountered any problems like this before? Roberto221 (talk) 21:54, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

I noticed earlier this week that there was a notice on those two photos that the OTRS info was incomplete and the ticket could not be issued. I assumed you had been informed seeing as you uploaded the photos. That is usually how it is done. It seems you didn't know about it and I now wish I would have said something to you. I note from Natuur12's user page that he/she is on the OTRS team. You might contact him/her to see what the problem was. You might have to resubmit the photo and the info you have. This particular thing has never happened to me, but other problems have occurred and they can be irritating. I doubt it was malicious. My guess is there was an oversight or mistake on someone's part somewhere along the line. Farragutful (talk) 22:29, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Cathedral pics

Any new pics? I'm about to send a second round of emails to the dioceses/cathedrals. Roberto221 (talk) 17:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Last month I was able to get the cathedrals in Joliet, Orlando and Harrisburg (odd travel month). I found people to get the cathedrals in Allentown and Kansas City, Kansas. I'm going to be in New Jersey next week and I hope to get better photos of the Latin Rite cathedrals in Camden and Paterson, as well as the Byzantine Rite cathedral in Passaic. I'm also going to try and get the pro-cathedral in Camden, but I'm not certain they use it much for cathedral purposes. The only other plans I have is to be in Honolulu in January. Even though that's several months from now I have carved out some time to go to the co-cathedral, so if you don't hear from them now a photo will be forthcoming. I might get to Raleigh in October to get a better photo of Sacred Heart, and if possible, the construction of their new cathedral. Those are all I'm aware of at this time. Farragutful (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll send out the emails after Labor Day. Roberto221 (talk) 20:50, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

PS - If your travels take you to Connecticut, we need to replace Cathedral of Saint Patrick, in Norwich, which is a photo of a post card. You should see what it looks like on Bing maps, it doesn't do it justice. Just saying... Roberto221 (talk) 20:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Unfortunately I have no plans to be in Connecticut any time soon. Having said that, you never know where I might end up. Farragutful (talk) 00:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Cathedral Pics II

I've been thinking about this for quite a while and I'm also going to email some of the dioceses/cathedrals to see if I can get better pics of their cathedrals. I've used the "Bird's eye" view on Bing maps and a better pic can be taken...

• Charlotte, NC - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral
• Wilmington, DE - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral
• Belleville, IL - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral, shows only the spire and clock
• Springfield, IL - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral
• Lansing, MI - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral
• Bridgeport, CT - traffic light and power lines in the shot
• Green Bay, WI - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral
• La Crosse, WI - it's the back of the cathedral
• Jackson, MS - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral
• Altoona, PA - power lines in the shot, it's not the front of the cathedral but the side taken from a rooftop
• Greensburg, PA - it's a side shot with a tent in the middle of the pic
• Kansas City, MO - it's a rear, side shot
• Dallas, TX - traffic light
• San Francisco, CA - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral, it's a rear, side shot of the spire
• Yakima, WA - doesn't show the whole front of the cathedral

Also, there are some twilight shots of Nashville and San Jose on their page which look better than what's out there now. I've been thinking about changing them. Look and tell me what you think. Roberto221 (talk) 20:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I think I would hold off for the most part. The Dallas cathedral has 24 photos and most of them show the whole building from a variety of vantage points. That's hardly a lack of choices, and there is one that does not have a traffic light in it. The problem with that building is that it is downtown and downtowns have traffic lights, street lights, signs, parked cars, traffic and pedestrians. It also has an impossibly tall tower and spire in comparison to the rest of the building. The San Francisco cathedral sits above the street elevation and is fronted by a plaza. One of its seven exterior photos shows this perspective, but then you don't see the cross on top. The Bridgeport cathedral would have power lines running in front of it regardless. The front yard does not appear to be long enough for a better perspective without the power lines. It would be difficult to get a photo of the Charlotte cathedral with its tower and not include power lines. It also sits above the street level so this photo is probably as good as it gets. Trees and power lines would obscure the Lansing cathedral. The Wilmington cathedral has multiple issues. It is located in the oldest part of the city. On the east coast that means the streets are very narrow and the power lines front the street. Should one stand across the street a couple of trees and the power lines will block/pass in front of the cathedral. Because the street is narrow and the building across the street is on the sidewalk with little or no yard in front the perspective may be no better. The poles that hold up the power lines are also placed in such a way that it makes a decent ¾ shot tricky. It's also a small structure so these obstructions cover a wider range of space than a larger building would. When I got to the Peoria cathedral last year there was construction equipment in front, so I did the best I could as it was the only day I had time to get the photos. It's hard to get a decent photo of some of these places and for the most part they are taken by amateurs like myself. We don't necessarily have the best equipment and little training.

Others would be easier to get a better photo such as the Springfield, IL, but that's not a bad photo. It appears the location of the sun was the reason that particular vantage point was chosen. The only one I would suggest getting a photo of would be Belleville. It's a beautiful building and a photo of the spire doesn't do it justice. It's also not a photo of the building, but a small part of it. You could also contact the guy who got the Kansas City, Kansas cathedral to get a good shot of the front of the KC, MO cathedral. I noticed he was uploading photos of KC buildings on the National Register and he took the photos the same day I made the request. He was very happy to do it, and would probably be willing to get photos of Immaculate Conception. Another guy recently took photos of the Green Bay cathedral, including one of the exterior that looks to have been taken with a drone. You might contact him to see if he would be willing to take others from the ground. Farragutful (talk) 23:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

List of the Catholic dioceses of the United States

I see where they commented out the Diocese COA's on the diocese page whereas on the "List of Catholic bishops of the United States" they totally deleted them. I tried to get an explanation from the editor(User talk:Hammersoft, the query is at the bottom of his talk page) but he wasn't budging. Next time, I'll know better on uploading.

On another note, got your tickets to see the Pope? My church is selling a $50 bus ride to Philly, I don't know if that includes tickets to the Mass. If it's televised, I'll watch it, otherwise there no way I'm going downtown. Metro will be jammed packed and so will the streets around the Ellipse. Roberto221 (talk) 20:05, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

"Hammersoft" is correct. Copyrighted images may be uploaded to English Wikipedia, but their use is limited to the page the logo/coat of arms represents. The self-made coat of arms are not 100% accurate. If you look at them closely, the symbols are similar to those used in the official coat of arms, but they're no the same. The colors are also somewhat off.

Personally, I wouldn't go near Philly. I have a feeling it will put those with the best patience to the test. I would think his major events will all be televised. I have a ticket to the capitol (outside) and I'm going to go even though I may not see him very well. I'll bring my camera and hope for the best. I was at Obama's second Inauguration (I have a connection at the capitol) and hopefully it will be similar. I had no trouble with Metro. I walked from the capitol to the Navy Yard station and rode the train through downtown and back out to Maryland. I'll try that again. Farragutful (talk) 03:05, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

5 Million: We celebrate your contribution

	We couldn't have done it without you
	Well, maybe. But the encyclopedia would not be as good. Celebrate Smallbones(smalltalk) 13:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Dodge City Cathedral

Thanks for the info! I'll send the email myself since DC seems to have forgotten. Roberto221 (talk) 04:43, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:QCSO100Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:QCSO100Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Farragutful Wishing you a joyous Christmas and a prosperous new year! BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 17:42, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Great response! I love the idea of multiple rounds. == BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 10:58, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia edits

Just read FYI, the 7th most edited pages on Wikipedia are the Catholic Church:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/wikipedias-15th-birthday-the-most-edited-pages/ss-BBotXIX

I'm not sure what it says when WWE personnel is at #2 and Britney Spears also made the list!?! Farragutful (talk) 22:27, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Catholic-Hierarchy.org

Hello. I noticed that you have edited a number of articles on Catholicism. A discussion is taking place as to whether the website Catholic-Hierarchy.org is a reliable source that can be utilized on Wikipedia or whether all references and information derived from it should be deleted. This topic is currently being discussed at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard [1]. As the website's removal as a reference will affect several thousand Wikipedia articles, I believe that the broadest range of opinions should be obtained before action is taken. Please contribute if interested.Patapsco913 (talk) 22:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

February events and meetups in DC

Greetings from Wikimedia DC!

February is shaping up to be a record-breaking month for us, with nine scheduled edit-a-thons and several other events:

• On Friday, February 12, NPR will host a Black History Month First Edit event.
• On Saturday, February 13 and Sunday, February 14, we're working with the Wiki Education Foundation to hold a series of four edit-a-thons at the AAAS 2016 Annual Meeting.
• On Tuesday, February 16, we're holding the Smithsonian American Art Museum and American University WikiWorkshop with Professor Andrew Lih's class.
• On Saturday, February 20, the Smithsonian American Art Museum will host the African American Artists Edit-a-Thon.
• On Friday, February 26, Howard University will host its second annual Black History Month Edit-a-Thon.
• On Saturday, February 27, we have three different events. In the morning, we're holding an Accessibility Edit-a-Thon at Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Library. In the afternoon, we'll host our second February WikiSalon at Cove Dupont Circle, followed by our monthly dinner meetup at Vapiano.

We hope to see you at one—or all—of these events!

Do you have an idea for a future event? Please write to us at info@wikimediadc.org!

Kirill Lokshin (talk) 16:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

You're receiving this message because you signed up for updates about DC meetups. To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the list.

March events and meetups in DC

Greetings from Wikimedia DC!

Looking for something to do in DC in March? We have a series of great events planned for the month:

• On Wednesday, March 9, we'll host our first March WikiSalon at Cove Dupont Circle.
• On Friday, March 11, the National Archives will host the Women in the Civil War Edit-a-Thon.
• On Saturday, March 19, the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian will host the Color History with the Smithsonian! event, and we'll hold our second Accessibility Edit-a-Thon at the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Library.
• On Sunday, March 20, the American Chemical Society will host the Computers in Chemistry Edit-a-Thon.
• On Saturday, March 26, we'll host our second March WikiSalon at Cove Dupont Circle, followed by our monthly dinner meetup at Vapiano.

Can't make it to an event? Most of our edit-a-thons allow virtual participation; see the guide for more details.

Do you have an idea for a future event? Please write to us at info@wikimediadc.org!

Kirill Lokshin (talk) 16:30, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

You're receiving this message because you signed up for updates about DC meetups. To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the list.

Diocese/Cathedrals

When I do the restore for the diocese page, I'll probably take out the sections which have pictures for Archdioceses, Dioceses and Former Dioceses(Gallery of Archdioceses, Gallery of Dioceses, Gallery of Former Sees) since we already have the pictures on the Cathedrals wiki page. I'll probably make tables for the Eastern Catholic dioceses. That way it truly will be a list of dioceses as well. Tell me what you think. Roberto221 (talk) 21:27, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

I think that is the best solution. It simplifies everything, and limits the information on both pages to the topic at hand. That way it doesn't confuse anyone, or lead to the accusation of duplication. Farragutful (talk) 15:08, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of Saint Thomas coat of arms.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Van Buren County, Iowa NRHPs

I notice you've done great work completing out National Register of Historic Places listings in Van Buren County, Iowa. I received notices of some of the activity because I had created the Bentonsport article, which I have updated a bit now. I hope you don't mind my editing in Burg Wagon Works Building and the others preceding alphabetically, mostly to add the associated photos links and to add the date of NRHP document preparation. I adapted your use of the {{NRHP url}} template to make the photo links. I have no problem if you want to drop or change any of that. In particular my use of title phrases like "12 photos from 1977" for the photo links is subjective, and I'd be glad to receive any feedback about that. By the way I have noticed your creating articles in many other areas over the last couple years, but I have only just now sought and got relaxation of my NRHP topic ban. regards, --doncram 04:36, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

@Doncram: Your edits are most welcome. To be honest, I just started using the new templates and didn't realize there was a photo component to it. Thanks for the heads up. I'll starting using it going forward. I think your title phrase is fine. It gives a context for the photos that are being linked. I've spent the last several months trying to get Iowa NRHP articles started with at least a short paragraph, and expanding the ones that had only a sentence or two. I've also been creating a navbox for each county. Little by little I've been making some progress. Farragutful (talk) 12:21, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Error in your File

I just noticed something in your "File:Ecclesiastical Province of Washington map.png". The Eastern Shore is part of the Diocese of Wilmington and not the Archdiocese of Baltimore. On another note, I'm getting closer to having all the images of the cathedrals.. Take care Roberto221 (talk) 21:09, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

On second thought, I just had a brain fart. Forgot that province encompasses the whole area...

@Roberto221:Well now, that's the story of my life.

I've seen that you were able to get several more photos. I'm currently in Florida, but I'm not near any of the cathedrals needed down here. I have plans to get several cathedral photos this summer, most of which we have but I thought I might try and get better ones. So, I'm hoping to get Altoona, Johnstown, Wilmington, and Paterson. I might try and get St. Petersburg as well. Paterson had scaffolding around it last year when I was there so hopefully it will be down by September. The new ones I hope to get are Venice in August, and the Anglican Catholic cathedral in Houston and Syriac cathedral in Bayonne, NJ in September. Farragutful (talk) 01:26, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

R. Bruce and May W. Louden House

Okay, so of that's not the R. Bruce and May W. Louden House, then what is it? BTW, I just looked at the intersection in question, so I believe you. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 02:58, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

@DanTD:From what I can tell it's an insignificant house in Fairfield. I contacted the person who uploaded that photo and a photo of another house in Fairfield that he took and is also incorrect. I told him where to find the correct houses. Hopefully, he will upload new photos. I've made similar mistakes, so I understand it happens. Farragutful (talk) 03:08, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Ericson Public Library and nrhp articles

Pic in article

Hi Farragutful, after a long time out, I'm back editing in the NRHP area. Thank you for your recently creating Ericson Public Library article! Its existence just allowed me to create C.J.A. Ericson article, using some text from yours, completing out some connections from the George E. Hallett architect article, drawing on another NRHP document (for the Julius Scheibe Cottage in Des Moines).

Hey, one thing you may not know: the NRHP documents' associated photos can be included in the new format of reference using the {{NRHP url}} template, as in this adapted version of your reference:
<ref name=Klingensmith>{{cite web|url={{NRHP url|id=83000344}}|title=Iowa State Historical Department's Iowa Site Inventory: Ericson Public Library |publisher=[[National Park Service]]|accessdate=2016-06-27|author=S. Klingensmith |date=August 1980}} with {{NRHP url|id=83000344|photos=y|title=photo from 1979}}</ref>
If it was a regular NRHP document, the title I would have used would have been "National Register of Historic Places Registration: Ericson Public Library". How to title the document and the linked photo(s) can vary, this is an example of how I do it. But I think it adds good value to include the date of preparation and especially to include the photos, which readers and potential editors coming from the local area of the NRHP place will not know how to find.

About Iowa NRHPs, I am working through this list of 67 Iowa NRHP articles that have been tagged "NRIS-only" since November 2013. It includes at least a couple that you started (two bridge articles are indicated). I am motivated to expand all of them, particularly the 10-15 that were started by me, using the NRHP documents that are now available for all or almost all of them. I used AWB to put a draft reference into each of these, which caused the NRIS-only tag to go away temporarily, but I'll remove the ref in a couple weeks for any that don't get expanded (and more promptly if I find any of the references don't link through properly to available documents). It would be great if you cared to join me in this push, and feel free to update status about articles there. Whether you can or not, again thank you for that article and other Iowa NRHP stuff you have been doing. Cheers, --doncram 23:05, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

@Doncram: Yes, we discussed the inclusion of the NRHP photo(s) in the reference last month. It's in the "Van Buren County, Iowa NRHPs" above. The Ericson Public Library article may not have the updated reference, but it was created either before I knew of it or before it was created. I have not gone back and updated all the old references, nor do I intend to do that. I'm trying to get as many Iowa articles started as possible. I'm not going back with any consistency and re-editing articles unless I know I need to do so. Farragutful (talk) 01:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC

Oops, sorry, duh on me about that. I remembered messaging but thought it was someone else, sorry. BTW I am thinking Awb may work to look for all articles in Iowa, say, that have nrhp doc but not the photos link, relatively easily, though I haven't tried it so I am not sure yet. --doncram 05:19, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

@Doncram: I know about Awb, but that's it, nothing more. I've never taken the time to really look into it. I probably should, but... Farragutful (talk) 16:35, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

I didn't mean to imply that you should learn to use AWB, if I did. What we do as volunteers can and should vary. But, if there is a repetitive task you need done a dozen times or more, like what a bot might do if there are thousands of repetitions needed, maybe an AWB editor can do it for you efficiently. And, I just applied AWB to the task of adding photo links where missing, for articles directly linked from List of RHPs in IA (so including smaller counties but not big ones split out from it), and it seems to have worked great! It found 32 cases, and the edits show in my edit history from this diff (on Albright Bridge which you created in February) onward. I just added the phrase " with {{NRHP url|id=|photos=y|title=photos}}", but where I manually entered the applicable id number, to each one. I suppose they all should be checked to confirm that there really is a photos document available, and the "with photos" could be customized to "with seven photos from 1979" or the like, and one can consider whether the content of the photos adds what you want to say in the article. (Like in this diff editing the last one of the 32.) Would you be interested/willing to help to do that? You could work forwards and I could work backwards from the end through the 32 contributions, say. (No problem if you don't care to, in fact this is my doing so I should finish it out, unless you happen to want to do some.) If we confirm this works out well, then we could do the rest of Iowa NRHPs in another batch or two later. This is a whole lot faster than "keeping an eye out for" cases or than explicitly trying to find cases where the pics link can be added, by any other way. :)

(Note to self: I applied AWB

• to source="links on page (only bluelinks)"
• links on=National Register of Historic Places listings in Iowa
• with edit summary set (on Start tab) to "add photos link to NRHP reference"
• to pages except where (on Skip tab) Text contains "photos=y", and except where Text doesn't contain "NRHP url" (i.e. finds pages where "NRHP url" appears but not "photos=y")

then ran it from the Start tab, choosing for each page presented either to edit it and hit Save, or to Skip it. The search found cases where just an MPS document is linked and no photos could be added, and it found cases on some of the pages named "National Register of Historic Places listings in ..." but those can easily be skipped over when they come up. It took 23 minutes to do the 31 after the first one. Applying it to source on an Iowa NRHPs category with recursion through as many levels as necessary would probably work to find all the other cases in bigger, split-out counties. )

I am proud of myself, at least for the moment. :) --doncram 16:04, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Not sure if this is crossing into strange territory, but AWB can also be applied to search within a user's contributions, it turns out. Since I have it running, I just tested it on yours, and it finds some list of Catholic churches, and then Bellefountain Bridge and St. Patrick's Church-Garryowen, as the pages where you most recently edited where the criteria are met. I did not make edits at those pages. Let me know if you'd like me to run AWB to find a batch of these and insert photo links into them. --doncram 17:09, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

@Doncram: I have no objections to your running AWB on my contributions and adding in the photo links when needed. You can also clean up the inevitable typos and other boneheaded mistakes I make while you're at it! I do know there are several mistakes with the official NRHP listings for Davenport. There are some properties from the 1980s that have no photos associated with them because they ended up in the McClellan Heights Historic District. Its as though someone dropped file folders once-upon-a-time and didn't do a very good job of sorting things out. Its the only egregious example of that sort that I know of, but it might be in others as well. I wasn't sure how far back you were going to take this, and I don't care, but I did start most of the articles in Scott County/Davenport several years ago. Farragutful (talk) 17:24, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Hey I have skeletons too, and I personally think it's best to get articles started with some info and links to the good NRHP documents, and I think you've done great serving Iowa and other readers. I don't want to zero in on your contributions; I am mainly working on ones I started, not because I own them but because they've been a focus of others' attention. It's just that if you want to revisit any number of your past articles (besides any in the 32 I am already doing) at the same time as working in the useful photo links, I would help get you started by finding the articles and laying in the photos links, without myself checking them and revising the articles accordingly. My deliverable to you would be only the list of articles identified in my contribution history while running AWB for you (in one session, with some indicator in the edit summary for each one). Only if you wanted and were ready to go through them after I did the easy work. I'm not even saying you should do this, and I gather you'd prefer to work forward on new topics instead, which is fine. So let's just let this drop. It was interesting for me to figure out how to use AWB again, and I will apply it in my own editing going forward. Thanks. --doncram 18:21, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Greater Second Street Historic District just recently, and linking to it from J.W. Garner Building. I just arrived at latter, trying to fix it up, and found that the NRHP doc for it is not available, but at least I could add refs you developed. I tinkered with Benson Block and Benson Building (Ottumwa, Iowa), too, getting them to display one more parameter in the infobox (to show CP added date i think it was). I learned about "indcp" and perhaps some other stuff from seeing how you did it the infobox stuff in one of them. It's nice to have some collaboration going on! thanks again, --doncram 03:20, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

@Doncram: Here's my rambling reply. (Sorry in advance. My train of thought sometimes...) NRHP docs from 2010 on are generally not available, but I just came across one that has been posted from 2012: Central Vinton Residential Historic District. They do provide the nomination forms, but not the photo cache, for many properties in this time frame in feature articles. I've found success googling the property name. (The NRHP website and I have a love-hate relationship, so I generally don't use their search function.) The new format for the reference on Wikipedia doesn't work for them, however. I tried to get some information for the J.W. Garner Building, but couldn't find anything when I created the Greater Second Street Historic District article. The City of Ottumwa also has an online resource that I've used for some of the NRHP properties in the city, but the Garner Building isn't in it either. Glad I could introduce you to "indcp". I forget where I picked it up, but probably from seeing how someone else did it. Farragutful (talk) 12:48, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

New Page

Let me know what you think. Edit if you like..

• List of the Episcopal cathedrals of the United States

Roberto221 (talk) 09:11, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

@Roberto221: It looks good overall. I just found photos of the Jackson, Mississippi cathedral, so I added it. One question, Why are cathedrals included from other countries, i.e. Hati, and those in South America? Isn't this a list US cathedrals? I realize they are part of the US Episcopal Church, but they are not in the US. The Catholic list has the same problem with South Pacific cathedrals. The Caroline Islands and the Marshall Islands are foreign jurisdictions. Although they are part of the Agaña Province, they are not in the United States by extension. I'm not questioning the US Territories: Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands. I'm only questioning the inclusion of foreign countries in the lists of cathedrals in the United States. Farragutful (talk) 02:41, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand it either but if you look at the page Episcopal Church (United States) and the Episcopal web site, http://www.episcopalchurch.org/find-a-church/browse/province they're included as part of the US. I could have left them out but since the web site recognizes them as part of the US, I put them in.. Roberto221 (talk) 03:21, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@Roberto221: No, it does not recognize them as part of the United States. Anglicanism is different than Catholicism. For example, the Church of England is a different church than the US Episcopal Church, but they are in communion with each other. The Catholic Church in England and the Catholic Church in the US are the same church. The Archbishop of Canterbury is not like the Pope. He has no jurisdiction in the US Episcopal Church, but only in the Church of England. It's a whole different church polity. Latin America is part of the Episcopal Church of the United States, which makes them part of the same church, but they are not part of the United States. Just as you wouldn't list Latin American Catholic cathedrals with US Catholic Cathedrals, you shouldn't list Latin American Episcopal cathedrals with US Episcopal cathedrals. They are in the same church, but in different countries. Farragutful (talk) 04:37, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

I thought about it after your first message, and what I'll probably end it doing is make a separate section or taking them out completely. I'm working now the Bishops page, and that's a job onto itself since it appears there's nobody updating the wiki pages, so I have to got to the web sites(all 99) just to get the info. I just hoping the web sites are updated more frequently... Roberto221 (talk) 05:06, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@Roberto221: I would take them out completely if you're going to leave it as a list of US cathedrals. However, if you want to make it a list of cathedrals of the Episcopal Church of the United States, then leave them in, but change the focus of the list to the church rather than the country. The difficulty with the later is that the Episcopal Church of the United States is larger than the United States. It's confusing if you don't understand the polity, and many people do not. We only know of it as the Episcopal Church, but there is also an Episcopal Church of Scotland - a different Church in the Anglican Communion - as well as others.

There are not very many people doing work in the Episcopal Church on Wikipedia. It seems to be more diocesan based rather than Church based. Some dioceses are well developed while others have little to nothing. You can see that especially in the bishops pages, or lack there of. There are also fewer resources. Farragutful (talk) 13:08, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Cathedral Pics

Did you get a chance to take a picture of Epiphany Cathedral in Florida while you where there? I would check at least once a week to see if they had sent in the OTRS permission since I posted them. Two weeks ago, I saw it was up for deletion along with Wichita KS, Victoria TX, Springfield MO, and Stockton CA. I notified the persons whom I received the pics from, Wichita responded back and sent a new pic. Stockton wasn't inclined to give permission and I have yet to hear from the others. So, if you're out, travelling about.....

Roberto221 (talk) 20:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

@Roberto221: Unfortunately, I did not. It was raining in Venice the day I had available so I didn't go down there. I went to Daytona Beach and photographed the basilica there, and I got the former cathedral in Orlando instead. I plan to be back in Florida next summer, and I'll try again. Hopefully better weather. Farragutful (talk) 20:34, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Diocese Page

Somebody wants to convert the Diocese page back to subsections and bullets. You may want to give your opinion. Roberto221 (talk) 00:24, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

notice

FYI, I mentioned your name at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment request: Doncram. --doncram 01:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge

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

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Farragutful. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Farragutful. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

photo request

Since you've taken so many photos around the city, if you any have free time this weekend it would be awesome if you could help out with this request. Thanks. APK whisper in my ear 02:51, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Barnstar

		Valued Picture Barnstar
		For coming through on an image request. Good to know there are still people willing to go outdoors to help improve the project. TimothyJosephWood 14:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Best Wishes

Dream Garden by Maxfield Parrish & Louis Comfort Tiffany

Farragutful,

I wish you the best this holiday season.

May the new year bring you nearer to your dreams.

BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 23:41, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

@BoringHistoryGuy: Thank you! Best wishes to you as well. Farragutful (talk) 15:39, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Columbia Avenue Historic District

Hey! Do you know if " There is at least one row house from the 1860s still in existence." is referring to House at 318-332 Marquette Street? I don't want to speculate before posting. Thanks! CTF83! 22:42, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

@CTF83!: It's possible. NRHP lists it as having been built c. 1870, which could mean it was built in the late 1860s. As I was giving this some thought I realized there was another possibility. The West Third Street Historic District has rowhouses in it. The Hiller Building on Gaines Street is probably too old (1850s), but one in the 900 block of West Third might be from the 1860s. Svendsen/Bowers mention it and they photographed it, but they didn't give a construction date for it. I would guess its from that time period though, but it's only a guess. Farragutful (talk) 15:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I won't link specifically to it. I don't want to provide wrong info. Thanks! CTF83! 19:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Also, what differs a row house from an apartment building? The Hiller Building looks more like apartments to me, but you have more experience in historical buildings. CTF83! 19:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@CTF83!: In general, row houses are individual houses built side-by-side with shared walls, each having its own exterior entrance. They're sometimes called townhouses. However, a row house can also be a two or three flat instead of a single-family dwelling. I have no idea how the Hiller building is laid out on the inside, but it was built in three stages using shared walls. That may be why Svendsen/Bowers called it a row house instead of an apartment building, which would be one building with multiple units instead of three buildings. The House at 318-332 Marquette Street is called a rowhouse even though it appears to be one building. It's probably considered a rowhouse because the individual two-story units are side-by-side with their own exterior entrance. The Rowhouses at 702-712 Kirkwood Boulevard appears to be more typical of what are generally called rowhouses. Farragutful (talk) 21:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh, ok, I see. CTF83! 19:00, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Projects

Hey! I might be semi-unretired from Wikipedia. You working on any projects in the QC? I'm going to take a new pic of File:Forest_Grove_School_No._5.jpg on Friday...weather cooperating. They did an amazing job revitalizing the building. CTF83! (talk) 18:25, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Actually, here is a teaser CTF83! 18:31, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Since John R. Boyle House is no longer standing, can we use this image, page 69? CTF83! 19:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Ha, I keep blowing you up! You're good at starting pages. I think there was some template program you told me about. Priester Building is currently empty. Thanks, CTF83! 19:10, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@CTF83!: So many questions! (Just kidding.) I'm going to be in town in a couple of weeks, and I was going to try and get the missing photos of the newer additions to the NRHP, but May weather can be dicey. My dad now lives on the east side of town so it will be easier for me to get them. But by all means, if you get the photos I can do other things. A former school building in Moline was just added to the Register last week. Even if you get a photo of the Forest Grove School I'll still stop by. The last time I was there the building was a wreck.

I have not written an article for the Priester Building because I cannot find a source with any information about it. The only thing I could find was a recent obituary for Dudley Priester, who built it, and then it's only a mention. Preservation Iowa has an article about the Priester Building in Bloomfield, but that's not helpful, of course. If you know of something, then go ahead and write it. I know of no template program, however. I should also note that they do not want those two or three sentence articles with the NRHP listing as the only source. I think "doncram" got in trouble, in part, for creating too many of them.

The photo you marked of the Boyle house is not the historical house in Davenport. In fact, the book is about a place called Southwick, and I couldn't tell where that's located. The former house in Davenport can be seen here, sort of, on its nomination form. (NRHP did a lousy job with Davenport, especially the photos. It's as though someone dropped the files on the floor and then tried to put it all back together and didn't succeed. To be honest, the photo may be in the McClellan Heights Historic District file. That one has several photos of historic Davenport buildings that are not in that district.) Anyway, the Boyle house was a two story brick Italianate, not a single-story frame Greek Revival, or whatever that one is.

I don't do much on Wikipedia with the QCs anymore. I update old articles from time-to-time, and have written new ones for buildings that are added to the National Register when I can find a resource. I also continue to take photos while I'm in town. I have now gone out into the rest of Iowa and have written numerous articles of NRHP buildings when I get the time. I'm working in Henry County now, but I've been there since February! (It's not like I put that much effort into the articles). Farragutful (talk) 20:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

LOL, I haven't been active much in a years....so figured I'd blow you up. ;) Ok, that all sounds good! I'm not satisfied with my slanted phone picture of the school house on a cloudy day...so I'll leave that to you. :) CTF83! 05:46, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@CTF83!: You're always welcome here. (I'll get the photos.) Farragutful (talk) 12:15, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Status of my Cathedral requests

This is the status of my requests for images:

• Received a response, but they never sent the permissions to Wikipedia so therefore they were deleted. I tried getting in contact with them before they were deleted but to no avail:

• St. Mary, Our Lady of Mount Carmel Cathedral (Gaylord, Michigan)
• Our Lady of Victory Cathedral (Victoria, Texas)
• Epiphany Cathedral (Venice, Florida)

• Received a response, but they didn't want to send a permission because they didn't own the image:

• Cathedral of the Annunciation (Stockton, California)

Good thing for the above two categories is that I kept a file of the images

• No response after multiple requests:

• Our Lady of Guadalupe Co-Cathedral (Anchorage, Alaska)
• Cathedral of Saint Augustine (Kalamazoo, Michigan)
• Cathedral of Saint Patrick (Norwich, Connecticut)
• Cathedral of the Holy Family (Orange, California)
• Our Lady of the Rosary Cathedral (San Bernardino, California)
• St. Ann's Cathedral (Great Falls, Montana)
• Cathedral of St. Joseph (St. Joseph, Missouri)
• Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception (Crookston, Minnesota)
• St. Mary’s Cathedral (Amarillo, Texas)

Roberto221 (talk) 21:15, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@Roberto221: I'm going to be in Dallas next week and I should be able get a better photo of the Tyler cathedral. I should also be able to get photos of Venice late next month and Freehold, NJ in early September. I thought I could get to Paterson to get a better photo of that cathedral, but that looks unlikely now. I noticed someone uploading photos in eastern Connecticut and asked if he could get photos of the Norwich cathedral. He said he will the next time he is in the area. Unfortunately, he doesn't live in the Norwich area so hopefully he won't forget. There is a chance that I could be in central Michigan and Fargo, ND next June. Kalamazoo and Gaylord are not far from where I might be in Mt. Pleasant, and Crookston isn't far from Fargo. I won't known about those plans until after the first of year so if you can make other arrangements then by all means do so. There is also a chance I could be in Southern California in March 2019. By then Orange should be a former cathedral, but I'll still get the photos, and I'll actually be closer to San Bernardino. To be honest though, that's too far away to even consider right now, and it's really an outside chance at best. Farragutful (talk) 22:44, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Contributing properties / commons

I have just been stumbling over c:File:Cobban_House.jpg and c:File:Cardell_House.jpg. As I have been fixing the latter on commons I removed the nrhp template as the house has no own listing and is only a contributory property. The former has the nrhp template with the id of the historic district. Do you know of any rules regarding that? Agathoclea (talk) 07:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

@Agathoclea: Yes. Contributing properties get the NRHP id of the historic district as they are not assigned one of their own. I see I forgot to change the Cardell House description, which I have now changed. I had those two houses' name changed when I discovered that they had been incorrectly identified by the uploader. Thanks for the heads up. Farragutful (talk) 12:47, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

That only leaves the question if Category:Houses on the National Register of Historic Places in Iowa should be used? Agathoclea (talk) 13:09, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

@Agathoclea: Yes. There are two ways that a property is officially listed on the National Register of Historic Places: individually and as a contributing property in a historic district. The former is not preferrable to the later. However, if they are listed as a non-contributng property in a historic district then they are not listed on the NRHP even though they are mentioned in the nomination. Also note that in the number count of contributing properties in a historic district if a building, structure, etc. is already individually listed on the register it is not counted again, but it is still included as a contribuiting property. In other words, a property can only be listed on the NRHP once. Farragutful (talk) 14:13, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

nrhp photo reference

I'm puzzled by your edit mostly reversing my refinement about photos in an NRHP reference. I was just meaning to help, adding more specifics, i.e. that there are 21 photos and that captions for the photos are available deep in the corresponding text document. Perhaps there would be a lighter way to indicate the latter, rather than a parenthetical note, or worded differently? But I don't understand your view if the edit was not sort of accidental. --doncram 13:11, 22 August 2017 (UTC) FWIW, I am given notice of new articles in Iowa and elsewhere like the Second and Third Avenue Historic District which happen to link, perhaps through a template, to articles that I have created. And as i do sometimes, I just showed up to see the article and to look for any small contribution that i might make to indicate support. I didn't/don't mean to imply negative criticism about the NRHP reference as it was, which was fine IMO, i was just trying to add specificity which I have been thinking is a tad better, but certainly optional. --doncram 14:01, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@Doncram: Actually, I thought I had made a copy and paste error. I used the reference from a previous article that I had just edited and I thought I had failed to edit the reference properly. That's why I changed it. I have no opposition to what you added, so feel free to change it back. Farragutful (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Ah, whew, makes sense, thanks! And I do admire your persisting along with Iowa NRHPs, glad you keep at it. Cheers, --doncram 15:47, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

wrong photos

Your diligence is appreciated. I just realized today that we do not only have to cleanup the templates at commons but also check wikidata. Just a heads up. Agathoclea (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

@Agathoclea:Thanks for the heads-up. I never think of that. I will try going forward. Farragutful (talk) 19:51, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Farragutful. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Belated best wishes for a happy 2018

^{The Fox Hunt (1893) by Winslow Homer, Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts.}
Thank you for your contributions toward making Wikipedia a better and more accurate place.

The pun in your user name never gets old. Best, == BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

@BoringHistoryGuy:

Thanks. Best wishes to you as well. I'm glad you like the pun. Farragutful (talk) 05:35, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Cathedrals in Minnesota

How have you been doing, hope everything's well. I've got one more to add to your "List of cathedrals in the United States". It's St. John the Evangelist (Rochester, Minnesota). It was announced two days ago, becomes elevated on June 24.

Roberto221 (talk) 22:03, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

@Roberto221: I am doing well, thank you. I had not heard about this change. I will be in Minneapolis in June, but unfortunately, I will not have enough time to get down to Rochester. I will be in Southern California in May and I hope to get the cathedrals in San Bernadino and Orange. Those are the only cathedrals we do not have photos of that I plan to get this year. Best wishes. Farragutful (talk) 00:57, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Hart County, GA

I noticed that you added a lot of photos to National Register of Historic Places listings in Hart County, Georgia. Did you add all you have? They really should have done an MPS. That is a county that I might get to someday, but it is a 5-hour drive away. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 00:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

@Bubba73: Those were photos, if I'm not mistaken, that someone else uploaded to "Category:National Register of Historic Places" in the Commons. I put them in the appropriate county category and put them in the Wikipedia page. Those were all the photos they uploaded that I know of. I have never been to there, personally. Farragutful (talk) 01:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Merger discussion for List of Masonic buildings in the United States

An article that you have been involved in editing—List of Masonic buildings in the United States —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Doncram (talk) 17:06, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, you actually edited on List of Hibernian buildings, where the same issue may apply. Your participation in the discussion would be welcomed. --Doncram (talk) 17:06, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Fred W. Meier Round Barn.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Fred W. Meier Round Barn.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Ross Grain Elevator) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Ross Grain Elevator, Farragutful!

Wikipedia editor Lineslarge just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this article

To reply, leave a comment on Lineslarge's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Lineslarge (talk) 08:42, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of Ogdensburg CoA.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of Palm Beach coat of arms.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:38, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of Pensacola-Tallahassee coat of arms.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of Salina CoA.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of Venice coat of arms.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of Victoria in Texas CoA.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of San Angelo coat of arms.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:03, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Diocese of Amarillo coat of arms.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:04, 4 July 2018 (UTC)