User talk:SJ Morg/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, SJ Morg, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Steel Bridge. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 18:44, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Oregon edits

You are invited to join WikiProject Oregon, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to the U.S. state of Oregon. You received this invitation because of your history editing Oregon articles or discussion of Oregon topics. The Oregon WikiProject group discussion is here. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants. New members may read about existing members and introduce themselves here.

Aboutmovies (talk) 06:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK and stuff

No problem on the nom and thanks for the work on SMART, its looking a lot better. With the WikiProject, no worries, join any time you want. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Gomaco Trolley Company

On June 8, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gomaco Trolley Company, 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.

Giants27 21:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

RE: Compliments

thanks! I'm trying to improve several articles relating to the MAX as well, including List of MAX Light Rail stations and the station articles. some help with improving these articles would be much appreciated! VN503 16:28, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Hillsboro, Oregon

First, I usually try not to blanket revert, but when so many changes are made it's difficult to do them one by one, thus the correction you made is the only one I made sure to restore (I'll address citations a little later). I was going to send you a note, but did not have time until now. Please note there were two things I cited as the reason, on was that the article is FA status, an achievement reached earlier this year. This article, unlike the others you have been working on, is considered to be the top of the line via the FA status. Anyone can still edit it, but many things have already taken place to reach this status. For instance, the article went through and passed GA, then had a peer review, and finally a month long review before passing FA. So, many experienced eyes that are thoroughly familiar with the plethora of rules/guidelines/policies and have many other FA articles to their names have reviewed the article and made changes. Again, we can still work to improve the article, but we need to keep in mind those points raised and addressed in prior areas. Thus, creating a separate paragraph for public transit (which really is about MAX as 95% of the content is MAX related) creates a two sentence paragraph above, something that is discouraged in most writing circles and on Wikipedia (at least for high quality content). Then with the addition of wikilinks, that was a specific area addressed in the FA review that there was WP:OVERLINKING. Here you can see a series of edits made by me to address the issue, which included removing one of the links you then re-added, and which helped lead to the passage to FA status. Further your "quote marks" used ("heavy rail") are generally not to be used (Wikipedia:Manual of Style (text formatting)#When not to use emphasis), and again would degrade an FA article that must comply with the MOS.

As to the citations, yes, there is now a problem. They were consistent until a few months back when the citation template people made some changes. The "Cite news" template used for newspapers outputted the info as

Last, First. "Article title", Newspaper Title, Month XX, YEAR, p. X.

Which is the same style as the non-templated newspaper sources. But they changed it to the current style with the date in () and moved it, thus there is now inconsistency. Which means the entire article either needs to be cleared of any template citations, or converted to all template citations. If we go the route you did (assuming you would convert them all by hand), this will simply end up being a problem again the next time they decide to change the output for the citation templates (or set it up to be controlled by user preferences), which would then re-create inconsistencies. And as much as I hate the citation templates, I figure it is the easier route, as many editors mistakenly believe they are required (the only requirements are that they provide enough info so that someone can verify the info and that they be consistent within the article). So, I will start converting to the citation templates, and you are welcome to assist. I'm sorry this upset you, keep up the good work. Aboutmovies (talk) 07:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and info on heavy rails. I used one of your options, but yes the point of the sentence is to tell readers there is not standard passenger train service ala Amtrak or even WES. I also re-grouped the sentences so that it might look better. But yes, you have a style you are used to, as am I, as is everyone else. It's one of the downfalls of a world-wide, multi-discipline work like Wikipedia, there are hundreds of styles/preferences and it will never look quite right to everyone (notice even now the templates produce somewhat different outputs depending on if there is an author). Otherwise, as I implied, your work here is great and keep up the good work. Aboutmovies (talk) 19:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Civic Drive

Nice work overhauling Civic Drive (MAX station)! Much more useful article now. -Pete (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, FYI, I moved it to Civic Drive, as there is no need for disambiguation...might as well use the simpler name, as long as there are no other "Civic Drives" covered on Wikipedia. Hope that's ok. -Pete (talk) 17:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

United Streetcar & Oregon Iron Works

I took a quick look, and the streetcar article looks fine for a DYK. With a little expansion so too would the OIW one. The OIW would likely be considered too short since most of the info is a re-hash of the US article. I'm sure if you look through the Port. Bus. journal some more and The Oregonian, and maybe even the Daily Journal of Commerce (plus maybe the Clackamas Review and Portland Tribune) I'm sure you could find more to add. As to a hook, I'd go with "... that United Streetcar of Oregon is currently the only American company building modern streetcars (pictured)?" with the proper image added. And just FYI, there is also an old Oregon Iron Works from the 1800s, and I don't know if they are related, but we may need a dab page at somepoint/watch out when searching for info on the modern company (especially if using Google Books). Lastly, if looking to improve those articles, you could see about downloading their logos and uploading them under a fair use rationale (see File:Radisys logo.gif for an example and use the upload form for logos) Aboutmovies (talk) 08:22, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I took care of the various OIWs, and it looks like there were 2 different ones back in the day. With expanding OIW, don't worry about it, just saw that it was there and near the length required for DYK. As to the logos, its rather simple, click on the link I gave above, browse for the file name after you download the logo from the company's website, write the article name without the [[]], and then add the URL you found the logo at. Then select the license (logo) and that's really it. The rest gets filled in automatically. Then just add the image to the infobox. The only caveat is if you find a really large logo, shrink it down to one that is infobox sized (250px or so). And with the DYK, the article looks long enough, is new enough, is sourced good enough, and otherwise meets the DYK requirements. And I hear you on not having free access to The Oregonian. I used to through school, and most counties also provided it online. But the Oregon State Library (not OSU's) stopped providing the funding, so most of the counties stopped providing it. I think Multnomah County is the only one that still provides access free of charge to card holders, that and a few individual libraries like Salem's and Beaverton's. At least most of the New York Times' articles are free. Happy editing. Aboutmovies (talk) 10:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I've done a screenshot before on companies that like to try and hide their logo. And your basic photo program should be able to crop and resize (don't know what file format your screenshot creates, but you may need to export the file to a png/gif/jpg option if it creates it in a BMP format). For the URL/source, just use the main page URL and say it is from a screenshot. Aboutmovies (talk) 10:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for United Streetcar

On November 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article United Streetcar, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

⇌ Jake Wartenberg 07:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Request for advice

Hi, SJ Morg. I'm an independent journalist in Portland, preparing to launch a wiki devoted entirely to car-free and low-car life here. I'd expect to be its primary contributor, but when you have a resource-y Web site these days, it seems sort of silly to not wikify it. The whole thing is still a few months off, but I'm asking Wikipedians who edit on related topics if they have any thoughts, advice, or dire warnings. Eh? Andersem (talk) 06:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey, thanks a lot for the response on my talk page, SJ. Who do you write for, out of curiousity? I'll probably want to read them. Andersem (talk) 00:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Good idea?

[1] Firstly, the other pictures were not of higher quality. Secondly, the image I added showed a more historically interesting trolleybuses of relevant manufacturers instead of just only one modern bus. Thirdly, it does not matter that the photo is new uploaded. Fourthly, articles should have a global perspective and now are five of six (sic!) photos from Europe. Fifthly, to have six images in the beginning is not a good idea, Wikipedia is not a picture book. It would be better with a photo, preferably in a larger size.And when the photo from Chile is a good candidate.Ankara (talk) 10:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for MASA (company)

Materialscientist (talk) 06:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Servicio de Transportes Eléctricos

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Interurban Press

Hello! Your submission of Interurban Press at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Nsk92 (talk) 17:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Interurban Press

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Pacific RailNews

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Passenger Train Journal

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Electro Scientific Industries

It's definitely long enough, and everything else looks good. The only problem I see as I don't see anything for a hook. If you could add the annexation bit, that I think would be a good hook. If you are looking, might try the Portland Tribune/Beaverton Valley Times website as I think their online stuff goes back far enough. Aboutmovies (talk) 05:27, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Electro Scientific Industries

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Greetings SJMorg. I want to thank you for helping out on the Delmar Loop Trolley page. (Jordan S. Wilson (talk) 17:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC))

Flyer 800

Stauss (Bus World Encyclopedia, p.62) says “… Western Flyer redesigned the body in conjunction with AM General …” (my italics). Unfortunately, I cannot locate (or no longer have) the issue of Motor Coach Age (October 1984) that has the Flyer history to see what the Motor Bus Society has to say on the subject. (Can anyone help out here?) Also, the OMOT article specifically mentions rumour, and includes speculation. Useddenim (talk) 00:57, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Good point, but p. 62 of the Stauss book is about the Flyer D800, whereas on p. 20 of the same book (the AM General section), he writes, "In 1971, AM General announced an agreement .... with Flyer .... By the time the first order was delivered to WMATA, in 1974, AM General had redesigned the front end and the greenhouse portion of the body. Flyer adopted the AM General changes [italics added by me] and produced essentially the same bus in Canada, as the D800." While p. 62 is slightly ambiguous, my interpretation after reading p. 20 is that on p. 62 he was just being a little more vague (probably just to save space by avoiding repeating detail from p. 20). Second, I have the MCA issues of Oct. 1984 (Flyer) and Feb. 1985 (AM General). The relevant text is too lengthy to quote here, but they both say that AMG made the redesign, although the Flyer article mentions that some have questioned this and that definitive info. on the subject is (as of 1984) still lacking; the AMG article (published a few months later) was less ambivalent. The OMOT article does mention rumour, but it concludes "This rumor is untrue as Flyer just adopted the AMG body design as their own." If your point was that the OMOT page is not a reliable source for use as a Wikipedia citation, you may be correct, and perhaps it should be deleted or made an external link only; I was not the person who used it in the first place. So, I'm not convinced my edit was incorrect. But thanks for the input, anyway. By the way, considering your inclusion of an external link to MBS, I wonder whether you have seen this new page on Wikipedia? SJ Morg (talk) 02:06, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

It seems that the preponderance of evidence is that the design went from AMG to FIL. My main reason for discounting OMOT as a reliable source is that I was providing them with numerous (usually minor) corrections as they were creating and posting their bus history and delivery pages. And WRT your second item: Does this mean that I should now create a page for the Bus History Association? Useddenim (talk) 03:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Last item (re BHA): If you have independent, third-party, reliable sources (as per Wikipedia rules) and are interested in doing so, yes. Otherwise, no. For MBS, I only had one, but could apply it to several facts noted in the article. I had expected to find other newspaper or (independent) magazine articles later, but it's now looking doubtful. SJ Morg (talk) 03:43, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Bill Naito

Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: List of parks in Portland, Oregon

Thanks for adding the image of Powers Marine Park! Feel free to take more and upload other images if you happen to visit other parks in Portland. I am thinking of having a Photo Drive in 2011, requesting that WikiProject Oregon members all step away from their computers, take some snapshots of parks near them, and upload them to the list. Ideally, the list will have an image for every park. Thanks again for your contribution! --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:13, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll keep it in mind, but I really only went there to photograph the Sellwood Bridge (since I'm a bridge fan). SJ Morg (talk) 23:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Merrill Streetcar / Trolleybus system

Thankyou for the info on the trolleybus. I will write a specific page for this system in the next few days and would be grateful if you could edit the the trolleybus side of it.--Wickifrank (talk) 16:06, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Badger Traction is one of the standard works on Wisconsin Streetcar and interurban systems. A hardcover large format book some 260 pages long and complete with maps, descriptions of the histories of systems and operations, and photos. It was published as one of a series of the Bulletin of the Central Electric Railfans Association (No 111), in the manner of scholarly journals. It has a Library of Congress number which I will add. I beleive it predates ISBN numbering. The volume references all systems outwith the Milwaukee area which has its own large volume. CERA was formed in 1938 and is still publishing original research regularly. I will add its website to the reference.

Personally I think that Merrill merits a page purely on the early trolleybus alone. I was slightly surprised to see that the Field Company does not have a page. If one references the Wikipedia project on UK rail you will see a completeness lacking in US Rail articles which, in a small way, I hope to counter, at least as it relates to Wisconsin. It looks as if the Waupaca article will be restored on the same principal.--Wickifrank (talk) 15:42, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Red Electric

Thanks for the fixes to the article. I know I didn't quite have the status right. (Should the article be renamed, even?) I see that PE&E also currently redirs to the article, but I know they weren't exactly synonymous. I have trouble untangling all the ownership changes of these early railways, but I hope to start a stub article on PE&E at some point. Cheers! Valfontis (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I've been working on the article for the past hour. Will upload the additional revisions soon, but then have to stop for the rest of the day. Thanks for the comments. SJ Morg (talk) 20:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Tram and trolleybus articles

Thanks for your comments. I have been a big fan of electric powered urban and rail transport, particularly in continental Europe, since the early 1980s, and that, of course, is the subject matter of the newly translated template (and the articles that are and will be linked to it).

Until recently, en.wiki did not have anywhere near as good a coverage of Italian rail topics as it should have. Although I can't speak Italian, and can barely read it, translating Italian is relatively easy with the assistance of Google translator. Since November last year, I have therefore translated approximately 100 articles about individual Italian railway stations. Now that almost all of the important stations are covered in en.wiki, the it.wiki articles about Italian tram networks and trolleybus systems seemed to be the logical next step.

Since I started work on my latest project, I have also discovered that there is very comprehensive coverage of individual tramway networks and trolleybus systems in de.wiki, so I will start translating some of the de.wiki articles soon. In the meantime, I have just created one very long overdue en.wiki article, Trams in Milan (not fully translated as yet), and will be creating another long overdue article in the next few days.

Which brings me to a query about nomenclature. There's quite a bit of material on both it.wiki and de.wiki about individual classes of trams (and trolleybuses). However, I'm not sure how translations of those articles should be named. If an article is about a generic make and model (eg Siemens Desiro), then it can just be named as "make model". But if a tram class is unique to a particular network, the issue of naming is less clear. There are several en.wiki articles about Australian trams that are named in the following form: W-class Melbourne tram. However, that form doesn't seem right to me. I would suggest that a more appropriate form would be Milan series 1500 tram, which is a form consistent with the naming of many articles about locomotives (eg British Rail Class 47). What do you think? Bahnfrend (talk) 06:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

New trolleybus category

Thanks for your message. I chose the word "defunct" deliberately, because that word is much more commonly used than the word "closed" in the naming of en.wikipedia categories. If you want to see what I mean, just type "category:defunct" into the search engine, hit your space bar once, and then hit pretty much any letter between "a" and "z". The search engine will immediately present you with lots of alternatives. Then, try the same procedure with "category:closed", and you will likely get no suggestions at all. Additionally, I think that "defunct" conveys a stronger sense of finality than "closed". Whereas you can "close" a trolleybus system for the night, a day, a weekend, or even, as in Kathmandu (translation coming soon), for more than a year, and then reopen it, a "defunct" organisation or object is very much a dead parrot. However, I don't intend to use the word "defunct" for all purposes. For example, in the near future I will be creating a trolleybus equivalent of Template:Historic UK Trams, and it will be similarly named. Regards, Bahnfrend (talk) 04:00, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Trolleybuses in Valparaíso

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 08:02, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Trolleybuses in Derby ... why not change or delete the sentence? Victuallers (talk) 15:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Palm City, San Diego

Can you please check the expansion count again, let me know how much more I have to go? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Additional expansion has occurred. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I've marked it as ready for use now. Nice work. SJ Morg (talk) 19:31, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Blue Bus Line

SJ, great work on these. The hook seems just about good to go, but one minor technical issue remains--Blue Bus Line still has one uncited paragraph, which is against DYK requirements. If you can slap a ref on that, both are good to go. Just let me know here or at my talk when you do. Cheers, Khazar (talk) 16:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. The info. in the paragraph in question was mentioned in at least a couple of other articles, too, but I didn't note which articles (and I saved a lot of articles), so it may be awhile until I get around to adding a citation for the second part of the sentence. But, that's not required for DYK, as you noted. Thanks. SJ Morg (talk) 20:06, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Good to go. Thanks for the quick response, Khazar (talk) 20:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Additional issue at DYK

I'm sorry to say I noticed one additional, more serious issue with your submission: you don't appear to have any barnstars. For an editor creating articles of this thoroughness, this is a lapse that we need to clear up right away. Thanks for the good edits! Cheers, Khazar (talk) 20:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

		The Content Creativity Barnstar
		In recognition of significant and well-researched contributions to Wikipedia coverage of Portland, Oregon's public transportation system. Khazar (talk) 20:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! A nice addition to my talk page. SJ Morg (talk) 03:47, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Rose City Transit

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Blue Bus lines (Oregon)

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

National Register of Historic Places corrections

Thank you so much for correcting the location of so many NRHP sites in Portland--what an awful error on my part! I must have copied the text from the wrong article and re-used it without noticing the wrong quadrant. Thanks again for your willingness to help. Hopefully many of these NRHP sites will expand, eventually to GA status, and benefit WP Oregon and the encyclopedia in general! --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:30, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Why is Balfour-Guthrie Building hyphenated while most of the others have endashes? --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:36, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Because I neglected to notice that all or most of the others – at least of the ones you recently created – used en-dashes. If I had noticed that, I would have left it as an en-dash (my first page move) until I could look into what is "correct". However, it seems to me that virtually all of these instances call for a hyphen, from a correct grammar standpoint, not an en-dash, and a quick look last night appeared to show that the NRHP list itself, all pp. of Balfour-Guthrie Building's nom. form (except the cover page, which also misspelled the name!) and other sources use hyphens in names like this. Is this point covered in MOS somewhere or a discussion at WP:ORE? I have to sign off now and don't have time to look. SJ Morg (talk) 20:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure about MoS--perhaps we should consult WikiProject National Register of Historic Places? --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Because someone over at WP NRHP said the endash was more appropriate I went ahead and moved the page back. If you find out this is incorrect, please let me know. Thanks! --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem. If for no other reason than consistency with other NRHP-related Oregon articles, moving it back was the right move. The response you received at WP:NRHP's talk page left me puzzled, because I didn't see double-hyphen versions in any of the source material, but I've done very little research using NRHP material (and don't anticipate any change in that; too much else on my WP to-do list), so I'm perfectly content to just drop the subject and move on. Actually, I just checked MoS and I see that MOS:ENDASH supports using en dashes in cases like this. Essentially, the only exception would be where the NRHP-listed property is named after a person who actually had a hyphenated last name, and probably very few dual-name NRHP listings are of that nature. SJ Morg (talk) 06:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Please bear in mind that there is currently an Arbcom injunction disallowing moves for the purpose of switching between hyphens and endashes. Nothing needs to be undone, but please don't move any other pages for this reason until the matter is settled. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Povey Brothers Studio

Thanks for linking up the Povey Bros! It's a lot of work and I've stayed up too late working on the article again to feel like doing it. Thanks for finding the images for Commons too. Too bad the First Pres pic is an exterior shot. Cheers, Valfontis (talk) 08:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry that I don't have time to do more, but I figure every little bit helps. Very nice work on the article, which I see is (rightly) up for DYK. SJ Morg (talk) 09:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

The First Domino

Thanks for your critique on The First Domino at Template talk:Did you know/The First Domino.

I've taken your comments on-board, and restructured it; it's still a work-in-progress (but what isn't?) and I intend to improve it further.

Thanks again,  Chzz  ►  07:31, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

+thx again [2].  Chzz  ►  09:25, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Oregon Slough Railroad Bridge

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

North Bank Depot Buildings

Nice expansion! Reminds me of Portland Railway, Light and Power Sellwood Division Carbarn Office and Clubhouse (a mouthful!) [3] and the remnants of the trolley barn. Valfontis (talk) 14:28, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Can't tell for sure whether you're just making a comparison with the North Bank Depots' alternative name, "East and West Freight Houses of the Spokane, Portland and Seattle Railway", or dropping a big hint about creating an article – probably both! – but I hope to get around to creating an article (a brief one) on the Sellwood building at some point, if no one else does it. But for North Bank Depot, there was a lot of overlap with research I was doing for three Portland railroad bridges, saving a lot of time. SJ Morg (talk) 06:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm mildly hinting but mostly geeking out about cool old brick former railroad infrastructure. I biked by what was left of the trolley barn a few years ago on my way out to the Springwater Trail and was curious about it. Saving the outer wall was a decent compromise, I guess, vs. tearing it down completely. Valfontis (talk) 04:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Wow! I just saw this expansion as well. Great job! You should nominate the article for Good status. This article could be the first promotion of the newly-created NRHP stubs. --Another Believer _(Talk) 14:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't plan to nominate it for GA, because personally I'm much more interested in getting new content onto WP (but usually at Start or C-class or better, when new) than in the work required to take articles from B to GA, and, besides, I think I've virtually exhausted all sources at my disposal in the case of this article. Another editor assessed it as C-class, even. I think it's already at B, or very nearly, but I plan to add a couple of sentences about the sale of the property by the railroad (in 1990), a point I belatedly realized ought to be covered, and then maybe I'll ask for another assessment opinion. I wish I had an old photo, but I have no idea where to find one (there are none in the HAER database, a source I used for the BN bridge 5.1 article). In any case, I found writing this article to be satisfying, because even though I'd noticed the buildings years ago (when photographing construction of the Portland Streetcar in 1999–2000) and could tell they'd been railroad buildings, it was only after I learned (from your stub) that they were on the NRHP that I discovered their history was much more interesting than I'd assumed. SJ Morg (talk) 06:00, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, if/when you "complete" the article and feels it meets GA criteria, I'd be happy to nominate the article and guide it through the nomination process. I would not be too familiar with the content, so I might need assistance if access is needed to sources not available to me, but if only small concerns need to be addressed that is something I could certainly handle. Just let me know! By the way, you might also be interested in the Southern Pacific Railroad Passenger Station and Freight House. --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:01, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I will see if I can track down any older images--I wish it were easier to find images for Wikipedia! The images I take and upload to Commons are incredibly amateur, but I figure they are better than nothing. Again, great work on the article. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:16, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

See talk page for question re: GA nomination. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the GA review of the North Bank Depot Buildings article has started. There are a few concerns in the review that you may be interested in addressing. Thanks! Jsayre64 (talk) 03:40, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Congrats on the GA! --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! And I appreciate your and Jsayre64's help in responding to the nomination. I was watching but didn't need to do much. To Jsayre: I don't know how I missed finding that 2003 article! Back in August, I tried many different word searches (of The Oregonian and other sources) looking for a citation for the renovation, without success (surprisingly), but figured my March 2000 photograph sufficiently supported that sentence, at least before we aimed for GA. Anyway, I'm glad you found one. SJ Morg (talk) 22:32, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Nice work, both of you! I guess I just used a good search tool when I was trying to find a source to cite that claim about renovation. By the way, great job on the Olds, Wortman & King article. That could be WikiProject Oregon's next Good Article. Jsayre64 (talk) 03:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for North Bank Depot Buildings

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nom for Burlington Northern Railroad Bridge 5.1

Hi SJ Morg, I have reviewed your nomination for Burlington Northern Railroad Bridge 5.1 at Template talk:Did you know/Burlington Northern Railroad Bridge 5.1 and I have just one minor issue before I can approve it. Could you see my comments and give feedback at the nominations page? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Burlington Northern Railroad Bridge 5.1

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Trolleybuses in Dayton

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Olds, Wortman & King

Gatoclass (talk) 16:02, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

template:flatlist

flatlist is designed to upgrade navboxes, to replace the format that's old and should be phased-out. It is about using html lists for navboxes, as that's what they *are* — lists of links. It also ensures that a standard dot character is used, that the dot does not have to be repeated in a half million articles, and that the spacing around the dots is consistent. The standard '*' syntax is more friendly to inexperienced editors, too. Please stop undoing this change.

See here for how widley flatlist is used in templates. And please use it in more templates.  —Portuguese Man o' War 04:05, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, but can you not identify a page on WP that says what you just said, so that I don't have to just take your word that it's preferred? Twice now you've ignored my comment that the leading (vertical spacing) makes the old format more difficult to read; is that something that can be adjusted in the template or on individual uses? I do concede that the flatlist is easier to read in the edit window, but please address my other two points. I only undid this change to a single template, by the way, not any others, because this is the first navbox I've ever seen that used the flatlist template (and I've edited several, but it's not a major focus of mine). SJ Morg (talk) 04:14, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm going on having read just what the code of flatlist /is/, and the supporting code in the site style sheet: (it uses "hlist")

/* Style for horizontal lists (separator following item) */
ol.hlist, ul.hlist,
.hlist ol, .hlist ul {
    margin: 0 !important;
}
.hlist li { 
    padding: 0em 0.6em 0em 0em;
    display: inline;
    background: url("http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/Middot.png") no-repeat right;
}
.hlist li:last-child {
    padding-right: 0em;
    background: none;
}

I don't know where this was originally discussed, but WhatLinkHere would find it. My point is that this is a progressive thing you've impeded.

Not following your spacing argument; they /look/ identical [4][5]; it's about being readable in the editbox, and better (and less) code being generated for readers and Google.  —Portuguese Man o' War 04:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Maybe it's your browser (or maybe you are editing on a tablet?), but I just checked in both Safari and Firefox, and the difference is vertical spacing is clearly visible in both. The old format has about one-third of a line of extra space between lines (I don't know the proper terminology), and consequently the full box is slighty taller (when displayed at same width) than in the format using flatlist. The html code you inserted above is Greek to me; I don't understand any of that, but if there's a page where this subject has been discussed, then a message about the spacing issue could be posted there (if this has not already happened). Meanwhile, please stop using words that imply I am causing harm to the encyclopedia ("stop undoing" – as if I had done it to several pages – and "impeding"). I was only trying to maintain the quality of the encyclopedia, and so far I only have your word and no discussion or MOS page to back up your position and, in particular, to address my spacing question. I don't know what is (apparently) preventing you from seeing the spacing difference on your computer. SJ Morg (talk) 04:47, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I was using Chrome. Have looked in others and there is a slight difference, mostly in Safari (which is a tad surprising, as it is Chrome's cousin). The code above could be tweaked to add more margin/padding and such; place to do so would be MediaWiki talk:Common.css. I expect the above was well-considered, though, and I don't see the spacing as a problem. You did /undo/ the edit several times, so it's the apt word(s). Anyway, this template is not worth the bother of talking with you. All yours.  —Portuguese Man o' War 04:59, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Old discussion:

• MediaWiki talk:Common.css/Archive 13#Horizontal lists

 —Portuguese Man o' War 05:10, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I undid the edit a grand total of two times. And the only reason I even reverted it a second time was that you did not address either of the two points I raised (in the edit summary) the first time I reverted the change, so in effect I was asking you again. If that failed, I was already planning to move it to a talk page, but you beat me to it. SJ Morg (talk) 05:28, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I forgot; Template:Navbox gives examples of how to use it:

• Template:Navbox/doc#Examples

Flatlist is recommended.  —Portuguese Man o' War 10:33, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Trolleybuses in Shanghai

Materialscientist (talk) 16:02, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Trolleybuses in Philadelphia

Materialscientist (talk) 16:03, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Mei-Ann Chen

Thanks for the corrections, especially since the article is a GA candidate. Would "One board member of..." read better than "One of the board members of..."? --Another Believer _(Talk) 01:41, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Maybe, and I almost changed it to that, but either works, and I was trying to guess the intended wording of the author (you). On that basis, I supposed that you started out intending to write "one board member" but then decided to go with "one of the board members" and then forgot to go back and add "of the". So, yes, go ahead and change it. Very nice work on the article, by the way. SJ Morg (talk) 01:49, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thank you. --Another Believer _(Talk) 06:54, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		Thanks SJ Morg for helping to promote North Bank Depot Buildings to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up. Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 00:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! SJ Morg (talk) 15:41, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Olds, Wortman & King

What do you think about a GA nomination? It's tempting to nominate it. It would be a great way to credit your hard work on the expansion a while back. Jsayre64 (talk) 16:50, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I nominated it. I hope it's good enough, because I can't really afford to spend a significant amount of additional time on it, but I infer that you are willing to help reply to any issues that might be raised by the reviewer. I wasn't sure which GAN subtopic was most appropriate, Art and architecture or Economics and business, but I chose the latter. Do you think that was the right choice? SJ Morg (talk) 10:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I suppose that's the right category. If the reviewer or someone else disagrees, they can probably change that. Thanks for nominating the article! I'll keep an eye on it for when the GA review begins. Jsayre64 (talk) 15:57, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Olds, Wortman & King

The article Olds, Wortman & King you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Olds, Wortman & King for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 21:15, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Another DYK?

I am about to start creating Fribourg–Farvagny trolleybus system. It will be a translation of the German Wikipedia article. As the system was formally opened on 30 December 1911 and commenced operations on 4 January 1912, the article will be a potential DYK for the centenary date of 4 January 2012, but if you're interested in nominating it, I'm afraid you'll have to add some inline citations, because the German Wikipedia article doesn't have many.

Incidentally, that article claims that the first Swiss trolleybus system was in fact a short, and short-lived, Château de Chillon–Hôtel Byron system that operated between 1900 and 1903. The earlier system is mentioned in the list of trolleybus systems in Switzerland, and is also the subject of articles in French Wikipedia and in German Wikipedia.

Bahnfrend (talk) 13:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have no other sources of information on that system. The World Trolleybus Encyclopaedia (WTE) only gives a few stats on it, the ones I added to the Trolleybuses in Fribourg article yesterday, and that's all I have. I've never seen an article (at least in English) on the Fribourg–Farvagny system. If Trolleybus Magazine had a feature article on Fribourg, it might give some info. on the early system, but in the magazine's nearly 50 years of publication, it has never had a feature article on Fribourg (i.e., not even the current system). As far as I can determine, it is one of only four Swiss systems (post-1932) never to have had a feature article in TM; even the three rural or interurban systems had articles in that magazine, and only 4 of the 15 urban systems have not. And I don't have any books about Fribourg (they'd likely be solely in French, which I cannot read). Thus, I am unable to help you on this, as I have no information. By the way, I didn't realize that the German Wikipedia had an article on the Fribourg–Farvagny system until you posted your message here.

The WTE makes no mention at all of any system existing at Villeneuve/Chillon in the early 1900s, not in the table of all Swiss systems on pp. 72–73, nor in a separate section on pp. 131–132 listing "Experiments and Demonstrations", and I've never heard of that line until now. I suppose it existed, as claimed, but without more proof (from reliable sources), I'm not ready to accept that, and I don't believe it should be added to the Urban Public Transport in Switzerland template (as a red link) without more information. However, I'll modify the text I added in the Fribourg article to remove or revise the statement that Fribourg–Farvagny was the first trolleybus system in Switzerland, as that is now in question. Your idea of a possible DYK on the centenary date was good, but I'm not sure whether articles that are based almost entirely on translations from other-language Wikipedias are eligible as "new" content or not. They may well be, but it's unclear to me. Point 1a in the DYK selection criteria ruled out your recent Edmonton article for DYK as a "new" article (as its prose sections were mostly copied from other articles), but I don't know whether that applies in the case of translations from other-language Wikipedia pages. Unfortunately, this is moot, as I have absolutely no additional sources for the Fribourg–Farvagny system. Sorry. SJ Morg (talk) 09:40, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

List of TriMet bus routes

Hey, I noticed you removed reference to "local service" in this article. I can provide reference that 34, 22, etc. were referred to as Local service a few years ago; not sure if they still are Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 16:50, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I checked a few at random on TriMet's website, and none of them mentioned the term "local service". However, even if they were still being described that way, I believe "local service" is much too vague for Wikipedia and would need to be defined on the WP page if used there. ("Commuter service" is also a little too vague, but someone gave a definition of that at the bottom of the list, and as far as I know it is accurate.) Since we have (apparently) no usage of the term by TriMet now, and no sourced definition of it, it should not be included. SJ Morg (talk) 08:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

That works. And I notice on Terwilliger Boulevard, you rmed the 60s because they traverse T.B. but don't stop. Is that worth mentioning in some way? Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 00:08, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Not in my opinion. SJ Morg (talk) 20:36, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Vétra

The DYK project (nominate) 08:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Vétra, etc

Thanks for your messages. I was always intending to nominate Vétra for DYK; your messages beat me to it. The reason I was a bit slow was that I decided to create Trolleybuses in Lyon before nominating it, because of the obvious links between the two articles. I'd already created articles about two of the other three currently operating French systems, and someone else had already created Nancy Guided Light Transit (which, admittedly, needs some work, and possibly a name change). The Lyon system is the largest of the currently operating French systems, so an article about it was overdue. When creating new articles, I try to give priority to systems that are, or were, large, or in English-speaking countries, or currently operating, or for which a good photo is available on commons, or which need to be created to transform a redlink in a navbox into a bluelink. But I admit that my choices are somewhat whimsical at times. As for reviewing another DYK nomination, I figured that doing a review would increase my nomination's chances of succeeding. (I have found that the easiest nominations to review are the ones of articles by experienced editors relying mainly on offline references (which can be accepted in good faith).)

A couple of other points. First, each of the talk pages on the fr and de wiki articles about the Château de Chillon–Hôtel Byron system now has a lively debate about the relevant article. In connection with these debates, both articles have undergone a name change, and now claim that the system was a demonstration system operating on only one day (17 December). But the de article says 1900 and the fr article says 1901, so I'm going to wait a bit longer for this discrepancy to be eliminated before creating any en.wiki article about the system (if any at all; at this stage I'm not sure whether it was notable enough). Secondly, the 50th anniversary of the closure of the London system will be in a few months' time. I've been a bit surprised that none of the WikiProject London Transport editors has added anything to Trolleybuses in London since I created it nearly a year ago; you might wish to do something with the article yourself. Bahnfrend (talk) 02:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Trolleybuses in Atlanta

Hi I am the original article writer of most of the content in Trolleybuses in Atlanta, why are you inserting links that say "motor coach" which is a word we have not used in the US for over 50 years? And then another link to "motor bus". I do not see the purpose of an article "motor bus" when there is a perfectly complete article "bus". Keizers (talk) 13:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

First, you should read WP:OWN. Second, did you read the motor bus article? The terms "bus" and "motor bus" are not synonymous. Much of the time, they are used that way, but not always. To some people, especially people who are not transit fans, a trolley bus is a type of bus, but a trolley bus is definitely not a type of motor bus. The one and only place where "motor coach" appears in the article is a historically appropriate use of the term, as it was the most common term during the period being described there (1920s/30s). Contrary to your assertion, "bus" has a broader meaning than "motor bus" or motor coach. If you are suggesting that no one uses these terms anymore, you are simply mistaken. There's even national organization named the Motor Bus Society, which is linked in the motor bus article (which you appear not to have read), which continues to publish a quarterly magazine called Motor Coach Age. Last, anyone who is taken to the motor bus article can very easily go on to the (more detailed) "bus" article from there, to get more info., with just one click. You appear to be suggesting that the motor bus article itself has no relevance, and I disagree. SJ Morg (talk) 13:42, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Did not mean to express ownership (I am familiar with WP:OWN), I simply meant to explain my interest in the article. First, I was genuinely confused by the use of the term motor coach, but then remembered I had read it in historical documents describing the demise of the Pacific Electric. Are we aiming the text in this article at transport buffs only or at a general audience? Second, I also still find the link to motor bus to be leading a reader to an article which is quite like a fork (I also noticed the article was recently created), considering that the broad spectrum of information, which is at first what would at be of interest, is in the bus article. The motor bus article as is written doesn't seem like the "first stop" on a journey to find out more about buses, it rather feels like I should visit bus first and then motor bus. The Motor bus article itself states that the term "motor bus" is "a now somewhat archaic term " and it concentrating on historical progression rather prior to the year 1960. so why should someone reading about something that happened in 1960 be linked to an article about the historical progression of the "motor bus" rather than a general article covering a much wider array of topics regarding buses? I am also wondering if there is some British/American gap here as well. Anyway, I don't feel strongly enough about this to argue with a bus specialist, I merely feel that it is a bit confusing to the average (non-transport-specialist) reader. Eventually we should have an article on Public buses in Atlanta or some such, describing the companies, types of buses ("motor coaches") used and so forth.Keizers (talk) 15:42, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I've revised the Atlanta article to place the bus link before the motor bus link, which is a very reasonable (and worthwhile) suggestion. I also removed one link to the latter but kept one, as the motor bus article does have value (as explained above) in educating some readers that the terms "bus" and "trolleybus" (or, normally, "trolley bus" in American English) are not mutually exclusive terms to some people, and that some people (still) use the term "motor bus" (or "motorbus" in present-day British English) to distinguish trolley buses from other types of buses. SJ Morg (talk) 16:04, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination for Thomas Cook European Timetable

Hi. I've left some comments at your nomination on the DYK page. Just a few further citations needed. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 20:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Thomas Cook European Timetable

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Stephen Birnbaum

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Oregon Electric Railway

Thanks very much for fixing the BNSF stuff. I thought it might be wrong, but it was late. I haven't looked for the information at the trains project yet, but do you happen to know if lists of stations are acceptable? I have a feeling they might not be, but personally I have a hard time visualizing the scope of the railway without something like that so I hope it is useful and acceptable per the WikiProject Trains MOS. Valfontis (talk) 20:28, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know. I'm not a member of WikiProject Trains, and my personal interest in rail is mainly limited to urban rail transit (and also mostly to existing operations), so I also don't have any opinion on whether station lists should be included in articles like this one. SJ Morg (talk) 07:57, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Cazadero, Oregon

Nice expansion on that, thanks! And to answer my above question, it looks like lists of stations is OK. Valfontis (talk) 14:49, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for the catch and corrections re: cause of death of Philip L. Jackson, publisher of The Oregon Journal. DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 07:19, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks also for your work improving that article and the articles on some Oregon journalists/publishers. It's very welcome, but I suggest you consider using the "preview" button, to save multiple minor edits in one editing session, to keep the articles' edit histories from becoming needlessly long. Cheers, SJ Morg (talk) 12:10, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. Unfortunately, I do use the preview button! Just my myopic editing style, I guess. I do have a feature on my watchlist that's useful, collapsing multiple edits -- so when someone has done a lot of work on an article, it shows up just once. I don't remember how I turned it on, but it might be the "Enable collapsing of items in the sidebar in Vector skin" option under My preferences|Appearance. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 06:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Watchlist and article edit histories are different things, as you must know. My watchlist is also set to show only the most recent (single) edit in each article on my list (the default setting for watchlists, it appears). But for edit histories (of any one given article or page), I don't find any way to collapse them. The "Enable collapsing of items in the sidebar" thing just means that, if that box is checked, the user can show or hide the 5-6 link buttons listed under the "Interaction" or "Toolbox" headings, instead of having the full lists of subtopics there showing all the time. Do you have something that literally refers to "collapsing multiple edits"? (I cannot find any such option.) Anyway, although I'm not a fan of that editing style, it's no big deal, and if it's your preference, that's fine. The quality of an editor's contributions is far more important, and yours appear to be good. SJ Morg (talk) 10:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Bybee Bridge

No worries if you are not interested, but I thought you might be interested in helping to expand the Bybee Bridge article given your interest in urban public transit. I posted two links on the talk page relating to TriMet's plans to upgrade the bridge and its surroundings as part of the Light Rail expansion project. Transit is far from my field of expertise. I am still working on the historical part of the article. If you are interested in helping with the transit aspect (do you have an interest in bridges or know of sources for incorporating other stats for the infobox, etc.?) you are certainly invited. Again, I understand and respect if you are not interested. --Another Believer _(Talk) 03:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't think I'll be helping on this. Although I do like bridges, my interest is mainly in drawbridges (by which I mean any kind of moveable bridge, with even swing bridges being referred to as "drawbridges" in American English, at least in the Northwest) and, secondly, in much more major bridges, such as Ross Island and St. Johns. Although I'm very interested in transit, I just have way too much partly finished Wikipedia projects waiting to be finished to be interested in doing any research or editing on this one, where the main topic is not transit. Sorry. SJ Morg (talk) 09:04, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

No need to apologize! My note was merely an invitation. Keep up the great work you do here at Wikipedia! --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:20, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Fort Smith Trolley Museum

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Birney Safety Streetcar No. 224

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: Astoria Riverfront Trolley

Great job on this new article! Well done! --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! This article was on my to-do list for months, maybe a year. I became more motivated after discovering that my Multnomah County Library card gave me access to articles from The Daily Astorian (back to 2003) on my home computer. I already had enough material from other sources for a fairly good article on the trolley, but that searchable Astoria newspaper access allowed the article to be much better. I wrote it offline and essentially finished it about six weeks ago, but then held off putting it on Wikipedia until time and cooperative weather allowed a trip to Astoria to shoot some new photos. SJ Morg (talk) 06:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

International Harvester Metro Van Great new photo!

Hi, great new photo that you posted in the article, thank you! I've been expanding and making edits to the article when I can and as I am able to verify information through old brochures and/or the Wisconsin Historical Society archives that contain the IH company records.
Is that your Metro? I have three that I am working on, two 1952 LM-122 3/4 ton vans with 9ft bodies and a 1962 AMC-164 Cab-chassis truck which is thought to be one of the last ones in existence. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 18:43, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It's not my Metro, and actually I don't know anything about it. I was up on the Steel Bridge deck waiting to photograph a bridge lift, and the Metro van just happened to come along. I don't actually have any particular interest in International Harvester Metros or other IH vehicles, but I do have a modest interest in vintage vehicles of any kind, so I took the photo. I was surprised to find, later, that there was not even one decent photo of one of those vehicles on Commons, so I was happy to be able to provide one.  I found the year from a post on Flickr, which means it is not confirmed, but the post appeared to have been made by the van's owner, so it's probably correct. I'm sure you can easily locate those photos on Flickr, and you could try contacting the owner there. SJ Morg (talk) 08:36, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey SJ, thank you on many levels for your generosity, creativity, and watchful eye. Its a great photo and I will make sure to share it with the Metro and general IH community. I will see if I can find the Flickr posting. Best regards, --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. It was my pleasure. Although I'm not involved in vehicle restoration, I appreciate people who do preserve and restore vintage vehicles – and especially when it's "less glamorous" types like this and other industrial vehicles. You can find the Flickr photos of that specific Metro Van here, but I don't know if that Flickr member owns the van or not. SJ Morg (talk) 01:42, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, yes. I recognize this van from other photos posted around the net. Thanks again! --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Astoria Riverfront Trolley

Orlady (talk) 16:02, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

LOL ...

ok .. now I know who to ask to proof-read all my stuff. ;-) — Ched :  ?  12:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Portland (steam tug 1947)

Hello! Your submission of Portland (steam tug 1947) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dawnseeker2000 03:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Astoria City Hall (old)

Orlady (talk) 16:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Astoria City Hall

Orlady (talk) 16:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for your work on Portland (steam tug 1947), and making my first article creation such a positive experience. Name Omitted (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Portland (steam tug 1947)

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Hi SJ. I have just patrolled your new article Oregon Rail Heritage Center. It is a very high quality article, both in terms of its completeness and citation of sources. I regularly patrol new articles and most are seriously deficient so I do quite a bit of copy editing. I could find nothing to fix in your article! Congratulations. Dolphin (t) 12:47, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! SJ Morg (talk) 13:45, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Punctuating "no", etc

Thanks for your message. I decided to translate Basel and Lugano before Schaffhausen, because they were both shorter articles about more notable systems, albeit closed ones. Schaffhausen will probably come into existence some time in the next week or so. FYI, I am also planning to complete the translations of articles about Swiss tramway networks I started some time ago, and translate fr:Tramways suisses and it:Rete tranviaria di Lugano, amongst others. Additionally, I plan to transform Bus trailer, which is presently a disambiguation page, into an enhanced translation of de:Busanhänger, and Express bus service into an enhanced translation of de:Schnellbus. I also think there should be an article cross-city route translated from de:Durchmesserlinie and radial route translated from de:Radiallinie.

As far as the periods/full stops are concerned, I have no strong preference. I just generally don't use them myself. That may reflect Australian habits of writing English, and I agree that Australian English is not appropriate for articles about trolleybus systems outside Australasia. As a general rule, I would have thought that articles about such systems in North and perhaps also Latin America should be in American English, and articles about systems elsewhere should generally be in British English, to reflect the English speaking preferences of the local populations and the weight of the English language literature about the subject matter. Bahnfrend (talk) 15:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Cook European Timetable

Hi, SJ. Re your comment that the cover [of the ETT] was red-orange in later years (as shown by the 2009 issue illustrated in the article; compare with triangle of red on adjacent cover), not really just 'red'): all I can say is that to me -- someone who was involved just about as closely as anyone can be in the production and printing of well over 200 issues of the ETT in the decades before it "went blue" -- the colour was pretty darned red! There were slight differences over the years in the precise shades of red used, but the image of a 2009 cover reproduced in the article is not very accurate hue-wise. (Please email me if you would like more details.) -- Picapica (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your continually high-quality contributions to the project! Your hard work is appreciated. Have a Happy Thanksgiving! Another Believer (Talk) 19:52, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! It's nice to be noticed. SJ Morg (talk) 20:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Seattle Central Link

Sir, You are quite right that the Central Link is 1500 V. As a modern LRT system, I automatically assumed it to be 750 V. In my view it is an odd decision, and one that I would be interested to understand better. Quite what will happen when the system is joined to the Tacoma Link (eventually) will be an interesting. Anyhow, thank you for the correction. I shall update my records accordingly.Bhtpbank (talk) 01:44, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

AB Award!

	AB Award!
	In appreciation of your contributions to Wikipedia, I hereby present you with the AB Award. By expanding and promoting one of these stubs, which I like to think of as seeds, you have improved this wonderful collaborative project. Thank you, and keep up the great work! Another Believer (Talk) 19:46, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Re: One-sentence NRHP stubs

Thanks for posting a note on my talk page. Gosh, I suppose I think of stubs a bit differently, but you bring up great points. I've sort of gathered that many newer contributors find redlinks intimidating. I thought that by 'taking the plunge' on their behalf, creating spaces where they can easily improve short articles, I was improving editors' experiences. Also, I suppose I felt justified creating stubs because all of the subjects are inherently notable, being on the National Register of Historic Places. I figured past discussions re: NRHP stubs were raised due to editors' personal preferences, which I respected but dismissed in a sort of 'this is a volunteer project and I can make whichever contributions I want' attitude. But, when expressed in terms of motivation, you shed new light onto the matter. I think I have done all of the stub-blitzing I ever wanted to do, so rest assured. Sorry if any of my actions ever stole motivation to contribute to the project. I can assure you that my contributions were in good faith. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

(Also, this is not directly related to the issue, but please know I wish I could expand every stub I ever started. I am truly fascinated by local history, I love visiting sites on the NRHP, and I still contribute to NRHP-related articles often. I uploaded hundreds of images in the Fall as part of WLM, create categories here and at Commons, expand articles, etc. I will continue contributing to NRHP articles, but will try to resist the temptation of planting more stub seeds.) --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Loss of coordinates

That seems to be a problem with Template:Infobox theatre itself. I'm pretty good at templates, but that one's a little intimidating so I'm not going to attempt to fix it myself. The problem is that only the "coordinates"/"latitude"/"longitude" parameters (which are incompatible with the pushpin map) generate inline and title coordinate outputs, but only "latd"/"longd" work with the pushpin map.... Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I posted a help request at Wikipedia:Requested templates, so hopefully an expert can fix it up. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. SJ Morg (talk) 19:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Seaside Aquarium

I see you removed the URL from the External links section, and added a note. My current understanding (always subject to change) is that the infobox is basically a repeat of things in other places, and all zoo articles currently have the URL in both places, as well as (for instance) the coordinates in both the title bar infobox, and number of animals and species in both the infobox and body. If this is contrary to Wikipedia policy, then I've been doing things wrong for a long time and have a lot of corrections to make. Just wondering about the rationale, since zoos cross a lot of other WikiProjects and so far nobody else has complained (which, I have found, does not really mean much). Thank you for any clarification you can provide. Cheers. Don Lammers (talk) 16:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for any confusion. I was told, years ago, by a very experienced and trusted user (via his edit summaries, in this case) that official websites shown in infoboxes should not be repeated in the EL section, and I've observed him continuing today to remove them when he comes across such instances. However, I checked now, and I cannot find any suggestion of this in current WP policies or editing guidelines, e.g. at WP:ELOFFICIAL – although it was indicated at one time – so I've restored the link, and I think you can continue to handle it as you were doing before. I also agree that consistency between articles in the same subject area is useful, and if WP has no guideline against handling the official site this way, then it seems fine to do as you were doing. SJ Morg (talk) 21:29, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It's nice to know about the previous guidance, which was actually just a bit before my time on WP. Don Lammers (talk) 00:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)