User talk:Jmabel/Archive 56

Box House

I do not know why I did that, I have reverted myself. Sorry for the inconvience. Jons63 (talk) 22:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The Facts

Hmm, surprised I didn't do that one originally! Sure. --Lukobe (talk) 19:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Now I remember why not--they didn't have a website and information was very hard to come by. But I've put something very basic together. Sorry about the improper citation format, but it was a bit of a rush. --Lukobe (talk) 20:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Seattle Parks and Recreation

Got this tag: "This article or section needs sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Alone, sources affiliated with the subject of this article are not sufficient for an accurate encyclopedia article. In addition, to avoid original research, any interpretation or analysis of a primary source must be found within the source itself or cited to a secondary source. Please include more appropriate citations from reliable sources."

(I had created the article as one of the outstanding tasks in WikiProject Seattle. So--a government source isn't good enough for this? Any thoughts? I don't know where else we could verify this info, off the top of my head.) --Lukobe 01:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Sounds ridiculous in a case like this. Did the tag come from someone who has a history of having a clue about scholarship or from someone who might be adding these mechanically without much thought? - Jmabel | Talk 02:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

In fact, at a quick read, every single thing here is the sort of uncontroversial statement that we should not hesitate to take from even a private individual writing about themself, unless other usually reliable sources contradict them. This looks like gamesmanship to me. - Jmabel | Talk 02:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

'Twas User:Seraphimblade, who appears to be a "deletionist" (thankfully he didn't call for this one to be deleted) and someone very much into "verifiability" and "no original research"... --Lukobe 23:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

That's all well and good, but you were citing precisely the correct source for information on things like how many parks the city has and how many acres of parkland. Doubtless any other source would simply be a less authoritative repetition of information from the Department of Parks and Recreation. - Jmabel | Talk 01:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I guess we'll let things stand, then. --Lukobe 05:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Or you can make him happy by citing a "reliable", institutionally independent source that will, of course, have gotten its facts precisely where you did. - Jmabel | Talk 07:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

u-district map

Thought Tremont became 15th, which is still there, of course? --Lukobe 23:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. So you are saying "Brooklyn" back then is now 12th? And that the University Bridge today connects clear over to what was then Summit, not Leddy? Is there a good source on that? - Jmabel | Talk 07:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Historylink (http://www.historylink.org/essays/output.cfm?file_id=3380) says 'None of James Moore's street names survive. His Tremont Avenue became 15th Avenue. One block west he named University Way -- the District's future "Main Street" -- Columbus Avenue. He called the future Brooklyn Avenue, "Broadway," ­ and this was Moore's intended "Main Street." He called 12th Avenue "Brooklyn."' --Lukobe 08:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Usually I trust HistoryLink, but in this case I'm at least a little suspicious, especially because there is a railway bridge where another street east of 15th would logically be. I guess I'll remove my remarks about the avenues pending solid sourcing (preferably by closely examining maps from the period rather than trusting one, even usually reliable, secondary source). - Jmabel | Talk 08:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Damn. I bet they are right. I aligned this with a present-day map; assuming that Latona stayed put, Dorpat on HistoryLink is simply correct. As usual. - Jmabel | Talk 08:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I just noticed "Pasadena Avenue"--now I know where today's Pasadena Place NE comes from! --Lukobe 20:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yup, that was one of the landmarks I used in trying to understand this. - Jmabel | Talk 00:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I just read this

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/04/wikipedia_secret_mailing/

Hear about this? --Lukobe 05:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Not till now. As with any news story, I'm sure they got part of it right and part of it wrong. Most of it is ho-hum: of course some of the core people talk to each other on a back channel, just like some of us in the Seattle contingent sometimes send each other email. If people are being blocked for being new and productive, that is simply very stupid. But if - as it says toward the end of the story - someone got banned for "leaking" accurate information that they had no legal obligation to conceal, that is even dumber.

Nonetheless, I bet it will basically blow over. But I bet a few more "secrets" leak before it does.

FWIW, I was never invited into this cabal. - Jmabel | Talk 07:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Mercer Island Lid

Don't worry--the bot did its job well. I created the article by copying that article and saving it as a shortcut before it was fully edited, so it really did look like a dupe. --Lukobe 07:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Linking Notes with References

Thanks for replying to me in Wikipedia talk:Citing sources#References for article sections! I took a quick look at Chin Gee Hee. In case you don't already know, I thought you might be interested in knowing how to link individual notes with their respective complete reference. There's a good example of how to do this with Harvard & Citation templates in Scat singing. Click on any of the items listed in the "References" section and you'll see the corresponding book highlighted in "Works cited", provided you're not using IE. –panda (talk) 02:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I have nothing against this hybrid half-Harvard referencing, but think it's probably not worth the trouble in an essentially uncontroversial article. - Jmabel | Talk 02:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Just thought you might like to know about it if you didn't already. There's, of course, other ways of achieving the same end result using ref, I believe. –panda (talk) 02:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. To tell the truth, I find Wikipedia's current requirements for footnoting a bit excessive, but I do my best to abide by them. - Jmabel | Talk 02:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, on further thought, I can see how that would be useful. But I'd probably use it only for the print documents, where there is a need to reference distinct pages in a single document. - Jmabel | Talk 20:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

:) That's what I use it for (print documents). –panda (talk) 20:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Garrigues

I am currently proposing that the Garrigues page should be replaced by the content now found on the Garrigues (disambiguation) page and the the material presently on the Garrigues page should be moved to a new page to be titled Les Garrigues, Catalonia If you have the time I would appreciate your comments on the Discussion page at Garrigues. I hope you will agree. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Replied at Talk:Garrigues. Thanks for pinging me. - Jmabel | Talk 20:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fiddler on the roof poster.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Fiddler on the roof poster.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Llorcs (talk) 07:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

This has been up there for years, from long before our policies were so strict. But, yes, I will address this. - Jmabel | Talk 07:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Peter Yarrow

Could you please include your thoughts at the following request for comment: Talk:Peter Yarrow#RfC: Conviction and pardon. Thank you --Jkp212 (talk) 05:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you please comment one more time on the Peter Yarrow discussion page. The discussion could use your input. David in DC (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Template:Seattle Government

Hi, I just added the two articles that you suggested. Thanks. --Toussaint (talk) 15:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 9 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Union Trust Building (Seattle), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 9 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Faustin Linyekula, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri (talk) 21:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

On 10 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles Antonio Ferri and Yoky Matsuoka, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Great job on the numerous DYK entries, especially with the double play - two articles listed simultaneously! --Royalbroil 04:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I decided it would be fun to do this again for a while, though I'm going to try to steer clear of being sucked back into debating major policy issues and addressing ugly disputes. - Jmabel | Talk 05:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Good plan. I avoid those debates for the same reasons. Royalbroil 16:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

On 13 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Regrading in Seattle, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--EncycloPetey (talk) 12:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Capitol Hill article

Would you take a look at my question about the long lists in the article? --Lukobe (talk) 23:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I've also never seen that "incoherent" tag before.... know much about the local churches? --Lukobe (talk) 23:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Never seen the tag before; I've certainly seen other articles far more worthy of it. - Jmabel | Talk 01:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Osona Arms.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Osona Arms.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

As with the many similar images, if these have now been replaced by better images, great. - Jmabel | Talk 20:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Osona Flag.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Osona Flag.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

As with the many similar images, if these have now been replaced by better images, great. - Jmabel | Talk 20:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Help!

Hey Joe, I've been slowly adding those tables to the listings at the Washington NRHP, and for some reason, the ones I added at Ferry County look really weird. I can't tell if it's 'cause I'm on a computer that only has Internet Explorer, or if I somehow did something wrong. Could you possibly take a look at it and let me know if there's something I can do to make it look better? Hope you're well, Murderbike (talk) 04:42, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks totally normal to me under Firefox, so no guesses. What are you seeing? - Jmabel | Talk 19:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The sections are all different sizes, and for seemingly no reason. Oh well, hopefully it'll encourage people to ditch IE! Murderbike (talk) 20:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

If you mean just that the column widths are different from one table to the next, that's normal. The browser optimizes for the content of the particular table unless you take explicit control of column widths (which, usually, you shouldn't). Yes, it can look a little funny when similar tables come in rapid succession, but with content differently weighted among their columns. - Jmabel | Talk 20:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured it might be something like that. No biggie. Murderbike (talk) 20:42, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Coincidences

Funny how one runs into them. Only last week I read and very much enjoyed your Regrading in Seattle article, which I found very interesting. I figured though that I would be unlikely to ever come across this fairly obscure subject again.

Imagine my suprise then, that in creating my most recent article, on the Joshua Hendy Iron Works - a ship-related project I have been planning for quite some time - that I discovered the company supplied the earthmoving equipment for some of the Seattle regrading!

Unfortunately, I couldn't find a way to work mention of Joshua Hendy into your article, since the reference I have says the Hendy equipment was used to flatten 60 blocks in 1921 and it isn't clear which particular regrading that might have been. However, I did manage to include a reference to your article in mine. So I must say I think that was pretty good timing on your part! :) Gatoclass (talk) 02:33, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Glad to be useful.

Offhand, I can't think what would have been 60 blocks in 1921. - Jmabel | Talk 04:48, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Osona Flag.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Osona Flag.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 03:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Again, as with the many similar images, if these have now been replaced by better images, great. - Jmabel | Talk 05:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK ready

...if you'd like to post it :) Gatoclass (talk) 12:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm totally missing context on this. I don't usually post DYKs, just submit 'em. - Jmabel | Talk 18:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Solidaridad Obrera

Yeah, I was shocked too. Now I gotta figure if the organization of the same name has enough material to warrant their own article. A few years ago, when I was in Barcelona, a friend found a copy of S.O. from Feb.'37 in a drawer of an old dresser. Now I really wish I had it, or at least access to it. alas. Murderbike (talk) 20:41, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Republican In Name Only

An article that you have been involved in editing, Republican In Name Only, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republican In Name Only (second nomination). Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 20:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK: Grand Opera House (Seattle)

On 26 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Grand Opera House (Seattle), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Your picture is on MainPage, too. Happy Boxing Day! --PFHLai (talk) 01:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

On 27 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Considine (Seattle), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Archtransit (talk) 21:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem, just newpage patrolling Jimfbleak (talk) 09:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 28 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Cort (Cort circuit), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Maxim_(talk) 15:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Eduard Pons Prades

Hey, got a favor to ask. I just translated this guy's article from the Spanish (in my sandbox), and wanted to see if you wouldn't mind proof-reading it. I also didn't bother to translate a quote of his at the end of the Spanish Civil War section, for fear of destroying it. Would you care to take a look? Cheers! Murderbike (talk) 01:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Proofread: I don't see any significant problems. Translating the quotation is tough, it's a bit poetic. I suggest that whatever you do, keep the original in a footnote.

Con el corazón maltrecho, por el violento trallazo de su derrota, se vería entrar en Francia, en las más frías jornadas de invierno de 1938-1939, a unos hombres de pelo enmarañado, desaliñados, malolientes, con barbas de pordiosero, de carnes escurridas, con los uniformes salpicados de sangre y plomo y el mirar de visionarios... Eran los primeros -los únicos- que habían osado plantar cara al fascismo en Europa, con las armas en la mano.

The most literal rendering I see that isn't awful English is: "With hearts battered by the violent lash ("whiplash" is literal for "trallazo"; "lash" is probably a better choice in English.) of their defeat, would enter France, in the coldest days of winter of 1938-1939, some men with tangled hair, disarrayed, smelly, with beggars' beards, thin and drawn (literally "of drained meat", but it's a more or less common expression) with uniforms sprinkled with blood and lead and the look of visionaries ... They were the first - the only ones - who had dared to confront fascism in Europe, with weapons in their hands."

I'd probably render that a bit more loosely, though: "With hearts battered by the violent lash of defeat, some men entered France in the coldest days of winter of 1938-1939, with tangled hair, disarrayed, smelly, with beggars' beards, thin and drawn, with uniforms spattered with blood and lead, and with the look of visionaries ... They were the first - the only ones - who had dared to confront fascism in Europe, with weapons in their hands."

Hope that helps. - Jmabel | Talk 01:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Great, that looks good to me, and I'll take the advice of keeping the original in a footnote. Thanks a ton! Murderbike (talk) 02:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Landmark category

Only for official landmarks, eh? --Lukobe (talk) 08:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Seems to me to be the only objective criterion. Obviously, anything we are likely to have an article about is in some sense a landmark for someone. - Jmabel | Talk 18:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Good point. (Happy New Year!) --Lukobe (talk) 09:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

John Considine (Seattle)

No problem, most people don't seem to notice when I edit for grammar or spelling. It's just one of my semi-autistic traits that I can't pass them up w/out correcting. --Rock4arolla (talk) 13:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Richard Halliburton

I don't know if the article is still on your watchpage, but if you still have any interest in Richard Halliburton, I'd appreciate your eye over my recent changes.BrainyBabe (talk) 15:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Basically, I'm not using a watchlist these days. But I'll take a look. Thanks for pinging me. - Jmabel | Talk 18:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I did some copy editing. Otherwise, it looks good to me. It could be further expanded, but I think that for its current length it's more or less the right article on Halliburton. - Jmabel | Talk 18:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your tweaks. BrainyBabe (talk) 19:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The way you have presented the footnotes is very tidy, especially the way that all the references to one source are collapsed into superscript letters as a subset of one number. Can you point me towards guidance about how to do it? BrainyBabe (talk) 07:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

At a quick glance, the best discussion is probably at this MediaWiki page. But you might do better to just look at the wiki markup I did in the Halliburton article. It's not rocket science; it's really just an arbitrary (but workable) technique they built into cite.php. - Jmabel | Talk 07:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Garrigues Flag.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Garrigues Flag.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Non-free / fair use media rationale now provided. These were not yet in use at the time this was uploaded. - Jmabel | Talk 23:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Overseas Chinese benevolent associations picture concern

Before I added my pics, can you please try and see if the pics I used for Wo Hing Society Hall and Chinese Society Halls on Maui would fit as well to your picture concern. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 07:09, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

You're going to have to refresh my memory on what was my concern. You don't link to the relevant discussion. - Jmabel | Talk 07:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Here ya go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_China#Overseas_Chinese_benevolent_associations --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 07:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, these would certainly belong in the Commons category. - Jmabel | Talk 07:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

More translating, if you want it

Hey, I've taken on the large task of reworking Confederación Nacional del Trabajo, which was translated from the Spanish as a translation project. Whoever did it, did a pretty shabby job, and I've been spending tons of time finding sources, and trying to fix awkwardly translated wording. If you're up to it, and have the time, I'd really appreciate your attention to it. I'm trying to get it up to at least GA status, but it's gonna be tough with the poor translation. Cheers! Murderbike (talk) 03:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

For the sake of getting rid of redlinks, I just translated the article for the modern Solidaridad Obrera union in my sandbox, would you want to check out my translation, and let me know how good or bad I did? Murderbike (talk) 22:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Of COURSE it's seen as friendly! I think what was changed works perfectly. Thanks! Murderbike (talk) 00:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I was just looking at this article, and the word 'convoke' is vexing me. The word makes total sense to me in Spanish, but the English version is odd to me, I've just never heard any one use it. So at one point, I changed "convoked" to "set up", because it was the best way I could think of to say it without rewording the whole sentence. So, the question is, do you think that the English word 'convoke' is acceptable, or is it as awkward as I think it is? Murderbike (talk) 08:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

"Convoke" is a perfectly good English word, and exactly the correct one in this context, although possibly a bit archaic (very much in my vocabulary, but I know my vocabulary is a bit scholarly). When someone "convokes" a meeting, it means that they call it together and (typically) host it. E.g. Pope John XXIII convoked Vatican II; a monarch convokes a parliament; etc. - Jmabel | Talk 19:17, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

If you have to explain that to one of the primary authors of the article, the average reader is probably not going to understand what is meant either. I'd unless there's a Wiktionary entry that can be linked to, it's best to dumb down the language a little. Skomorokh ^incite 19:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

wikt:convoke. But I notice they also define it as "convene", probably a more common word, and perhaps the one we should use. The connotations are slightly different (which the Wiktionary omits to mention): to convoke a meeting suggests more independent initiative; one can convene a meeting that was already scheduled (for example) by the previous meeting of the same body; "convoke" suggests agency in bringing the meeting about.

In any case, I'm not going to argue with any choice here; I agree that if the word is too obscure for you, then it is probably too obscure. - Jmabel | Talk 19:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, given the acceptable wiktionary, the comprehensibility is no longer an issue, so accuracy takes precedence; I have restored "convoke" with an explanatory link. Skomorokh ^incite 19:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. I felt really weird about understanding the Spanish better than the English. Murderbike (talk) 00:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

CNT

Cool, after tomorrow, I'll be technically homeless for two weeks, so won't really be able to do much either. Hopefully momentum doesn't get lost. I'll let ya know if I need help with anything in particular. Cheers! Murderbike (talk) 05:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I'm actually chronically "technically" homeless. I travel so much that I don't really keep houses for very long stints of time, and spend a lot of time either traveling or bouncing around from couch to couch. I moved out of my house in seattle before christmas and have been staying at my girlfriend's parent's house in spokane. I don't get to move into my new place in Tacoma until february, so I'm just gonna goof around between bellingham, seattle, olympia, and tacoma until I can move in. It's great fun actually, don't have to pay rent, and get to goof off with friends I don't see all the time. Thanks for the concern though! Oh, and I thought I did put an email in, maybe it's just not available to people or something? Murderbike (talk) 05:20, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York Theatre

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York Theatre, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York Theatre and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York Theatre during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —  MusicMaker5376 20:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

User HolyShiznik

I am tired of his vandalizing edits on Romania. He ignored all the notices about his edits. What is the quickest way to make sure he is banned from editing that article? Thanks, Nergaal (talk) 14:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I have blocked him indefinitely. He'd also forged a praising comment under my name! - Jmabel | Talk 16:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Shining Path GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I have left this message on your talk page since you have significantly edited the article. I'm specifically going over all of the "World History-Americas" articles. I have reviewed Shining Path and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix. I have also left messages on the talk pages for other editors and a few related WikiProjects to spread the workload around some. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 19:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

List of bars and clubs on Capitol Hill article

This was posted on my talk page --Lukobe (talk) 01:32, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

List of bars and clubs on Capitol Hill, Seattle

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article List of bars and clubs on Capitol Hill, Seattle, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 19:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments on User talk:Ngoogs

The user can not be blocked without a full set warnings or at least 2 warnings one of which must be the final warning. If the user attacks you or other editors two more time, on the second time you report to WP:AIV. I will be watching his contributions for you. Have a good day Rgoodermote  01:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. He has been unremittingly uncivil. And I already gave him a warning, quite politely worded, I might add. So are you going to give him that "final warning"? I gave him the first warning, which he responded to by insulting me. - Jmabel | Talk 01:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I have issued his final warning the edit can be seen here. Rgoodermote  01:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

What can be seen there is him calling someone a "douchebag" again. Doesn't look like a warning to me. - Jmabel | Talk 01:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I did not show you the warning in the diff, its an off day...I also did not notice you were an admin until just a little while ago (thought you were a new editor..couple months..note need to check logs and user pages from now on). I am sorry please forgive me for my stupidity in this incident. Rgoodermote  01:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I will be logging off after your next comment I need to get a little bit more sleep. Rgoodermote  01:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Removed conversation from my talk page, I will respond to any comments on your talk page when I notice them. But I would like to end it here with this being the official last comment I make. Good Night and happy editing. Rgoodermote  01:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding The "Big Muddy" of Pete Seeger

I left a message on the talk page for you regarding Pete Seeger, and would appreciate it if you would take a look. Thanks. --leahtwosaints (talk) 03:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Followed this up; the relevant citation is now in the article. - Jmabel | Talk 23:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

CNT progress

Hey, so, I don't know how busy you are, but Skomorokh has suggested moving on to GA review with this article. I definitely want to wait until next week when I'll have constant internet access, and have specified a few things that I know need to be taken care of. I'd also like to make sure that you'll be able to be a part of the process if you want. Personally I'd also like to see if people think we have potential to get it up to FA instead of just GA. So, yeah, if you have time, discussion has started on the talk page. Hope you're well, Murderbike (talk) 23:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I will have time to look at it some time in the next couple of days. - Jmabel | Talk 23:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Did the one thing I could do quickly, tried to answer some questions; if you have specifics where you are stuck, let me know & I'll try to help. - Jmabel | Talk 02:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Ferentari

Hello and sorry for the delay. I contacted Ronline about the matter but he made no reply. I have yet to really sift through the sources but my instinct at least is to prefer his version over Dl.goe's. However, I will keep the matter in mind and eventually try to sort it out. Best, Biruitorul (talk) 17:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ion_Petre_Stoican.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Ion_Petre_Stoican.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 16:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Rationale now provided. At the time I originally uploaded this, no explicit rationale was required for the use of a promo picture on an article about the person in question. - Jmabel | Talk 17:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Pioneer Square

Hey, I don't know if you saw this or not, but it looks as though PS has gotten another boundary increase, but I don't know if that's in addition the two listed on the King County list or not. Hope your new job's going well! Murderbike (talk) 05:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. See my remark at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Seattle#Pioneer Square-Skid Road District, which is probably the best place to take this up. - Jmabel | Talk 05:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you know...

...if Image:Ft Nisqually blockhouse.jpg is part of the "Fort Nisqually Granary and Factor's House"? I'm planning on going out to Point Defiance soon to take some pictures, but wasn't sure if this photo was part of this NRHP site. Murderbike (talk) 06:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge, but I imagine someone out there will know just what portion of the site is NRHP. I'm pretty sure the blockhouse is a reproduction, though. - Jmabel | Talk 17:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

CNT translating help

Hey, so I'm trying to source "In turn, the unions of neighbouring municipalities can group together into a comarcal federation.", and maybe expand a bit, and I've got "Cuando varios pueblos constituyan la Federación Comarcal, la cotización correspondiente a la Local debe pasar a la Primera." from the CNT statutes, but the last half of the sentence kind of confuses me. Can you make something useful out of it? Cheers, Murderbike (talk) 04:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a little tricky without context, but roughly "When various villages [but also possibly, especially if the original was in Catalan, districts of a city, etc.] constitute the Comarcal Assembly, the quota/allocation corresponding to the place should pass to the Primera." I'm not sure how to understand that last word in this context. Literally, of course, it is "First". Is it possible that this means something in particular here that can be gleaned from context? If not, you'd probably have to ask a native or near-native speaker to find out exactly what's going on with that word. It seems to be saying that the allocation (of votes?) to the various smaller locales passes to the larger collective entity. - Jmabel | Talk 06:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

As well, I went ahead and reworked some parts and found sources for Solidaridad Obrera (historical union). There it is:) Murderbike (talk) 02:24, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Ira Aldridge

May I thank you for your work on Ira Aldridge? I have a friendly question; on August 16, 2005, you added, "He mastered enough Russian to perform roles in that language." Do you have a reference for that? I ask in that I'm directing a play about him and his second wife Amanda "von" Brandt (great singer though she was, she was not a countess!) It was common for English stage stars to tour the Continent and perform, particularly Shakespeare, in English with the rest of the cast performing in the native language of the audience. Robert Greer (talk) 23:31, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I wrote that so long ago I can't recall where that came from and, sadly, none of us on Wikipedia were really citing as carefully then as has now become par for the course. He spent almost a decade in Russia and Poland toward the end of his life, so, really, it would almost be a given, but I can't remember a specific citation. - Jmabel | Talk 05:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that he may have learned Russian, but the Czarist court spoke French, particularly in the arts. His appearances on stage in Paris would almost surely have been in English with French actors performing the other roles in French; this was standard theatre practice for British Shakespearans. So it is risky to assume that he played in Russian even if he spoke it fluently. I happen to have taken Russian in high school and lived in a Russian language house in college and learned Swedish, which was his wife's native language, in graduate school, where I learned of Ira Aldridge though not of his wife: it seems to have been preordained that I direct this play. Robert Greer (talk) 18:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Ballet Talk

Unrelated question: to you happen to participate in Ballet Talk? - Jmabel | Talk 05:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I was unaware of its existence; thank you for the tip! Robert Greer (talk) 17:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Bill Evans Dance

I see that you started Bill Evans Dance, but it got speedy-deleted? I'm not even a big dance buff and I know Evans' work. Certainly deserves an article. Being an admin, I took a look at the deleted article, and I can see why it got deleted: nothing there indicated why Evans or his troupe are notable. I strongly encourage you to try doing an article on them again, but one that give people a clue why they would care.

If you want a copy of your previous, deleted text, let me know. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I will likely take you up on this kind offer -- but after New York City Ballet's winter season (they have $15 tickets, and they're good seats!) Robert Greer (talk) 02:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Young Gods Weill.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Young Gods Weill.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 23:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

If it's unused, feel free to kill it. - Jmabel | Talk 01:19, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

dyk

On February 8, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cascade, Seattle, Washington, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)