Eliphaletnott

This user is a participant in
WikiProject Philosophy.

This user is a participant in the
Analytic philosophy
task force.

This user is a participant in the
Epistemology task force.

This user is a participant in the
Philosophers task force.

This user is a participant in WikiProject Higher education.

Welcome

Hello, Eliphaletnott, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Sandstein  19:56, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: talk

Sure. Testing out your new talk page? upstateNYer 15:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

No. Wanted to communicate with you privately. The current Union College page is sub-par, and certainly far less detailed and informative than several of the college "featured pages" (e.g., Dartmouth). Ellen Fladger, Head of Special Collections at Union, and I (Library Director) are teaching a class this Spring on the History of UC and Higher Education in the 19th Century. We would like to make a class project of bringing the UC page up to something close to featured page status (along with the entries on Nott and the Nott Memorial, and possibly Josef Ramee, designer of the campus and of the UVirgina campus for Jefferson). I spoke with "Sandstein" about the project, and he didn't see a problem so long as everyone involved clearly identified themselves as part of this class and project. Our aim is to create a thoroughly-researched, well-documented, and completely objective entry--warts and all, if necessary. How do you feel about that? Eliphaletnott (talk) 19:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a wonderful idea! I've always thought more educators should do things like this, so bravo. I couldn't find the comments made by Sandstein; would you mind including a link? He's most likely referencing the Conflict of Interest policy. All due respect to Sandstein as an admin (and editor!), I would suggest not identifying yourselves openly, citing Ignore All Rules. Unfortunately, there have been situations of real-life stalking between editors, and if you identify yourself enough, your identiy could be known (consider reading this; note it's not a policy, but a personal essay). It's not common, but if you mention the actual class name, any person can find out where you're meeting during a given semester from the school website. I would advise limiting your disclosure to just having each user say something on their userpage like "Full disclosure: I am editing Union College, Nott Memorial, etc. as part of a class and am working with <insert all other class members here>".

To get past the ugly part, I would very much encourage a class project to improve these articles. I noticed the article is lacking in images also. I have a few featured pictures and would be happy to go out and take a few images of the campus when the weather's good and leaves are back. Are you well-versed in the process of getting an article at Good or Featured status? Any questions, don't hesitate to ask. I look forward to keeping up on the progress of this article. upstateNYer 16:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Any update on this? I noticed another user is making edits that keep getting reverted by a bot script. The user is Uniongeosciencestudent. Let me know if I can help; I really wanna see an educational class be successful in bringing an article to good or featured status. Youtube links are frowned upon in external links sections. Have a look-see here. upstateNYer 21:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

The class starts on Monday; the other instructor and I are working on a HELP manual for style and content for our students; we have not decided whether to let students post directly (with our approval), or we should post all edits. The geology student is apparently responsible for the disproportionate content on the geology and env. sciences program (and the instructor may be as well). The endowment amount suddenly changed from $800M to $300M (which is more accurate). We are going to assign different groups in the class to tackle separate sections of the article; these will be there paper assignments for much of the class.Eliphaletnott (talk) 12:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Question: Should we edit the existing article bit-by-bit, or wait until we have created the entire new article, and simply replace the existing one all at once? Eliphaletnott (talk) 13:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Generally I would say it's bad practice to just replace an article with a completely new one. Granted you always have WP:IAR and WP:BOLD on your side. But for the sake of others that may want to read over changes, doing it section by section might be the best idea. Also, you may want to see this. Another user—an author on books about Wikipedia—is offering free copies to teachers doing just what you're doing. Leave a message on his talk page and maybe you can score those free copies. Also, I just stumbled upon this and this, which may be helpful. But again, they are not policies, just guidelines that may decide not to follow. Best, upstateNYer 14:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Reference Link Broken

Fixed. Have a look at WP:CITE, which offers the best way of creating inline citations on Wikipedia. upstateNYer 17:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! At this point, we have developed a table of contents based on Dartmouth, Georgetown, and RPI. We are going to assign pairs of students to research and write mini-term-papers on each section, then revise and condense those essays into WP form and format. We will ask each student to register, and to declare him or herself a member of this class, so that they each can be part of TALK and receive feedback and criticism. Eliphaletnott (talk) 19:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Best of luck. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have. upstateNYer 19:33, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Class Comments

When posting on a talk (aka discussion) page, please sign your posts with 4 tildes: ~~~~

• Hey professor...<nebsoccer13>

Hello Professor. Just adding my comment to the talk page. See you in class! Rpaige617 (talk) 16:30, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

• I am not sure if I am correct, but is this posting a comment on your talk page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theidol (talk • contribs) 19:56, April 3, 2009 (UTC)
• Hi professor! See you in class tomorrow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcsap (talk • contribs) 14:14, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
• Hello! I hope this is right! Nikkisunshine (talk) 16:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
• Hi professor! I hope this is right! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sousleslois (talk • contribs) 17:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
• Work? Mittens63 (talk) 23:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
• Hello Professor, see you in class! Laser1988 (talk) 05:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello professor, hope this is right and see you in class! Unionreamer (talk) 18:34, 8 April 2009 (UTC) Hi professor sorry for the delay see you at one o'clock[{User:PeterCrispin09IPeterCrispin09]] ({[User talk:PeterCrispin09Italk]]) 8:29 9 April 2009(UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.52.218.45 (talk)

Working in Userspace

I never thought to mention this to you, but you (and anybody else) has the ability to work on the article within your userspace. You can do all the same things within your userspace (except use fair use images, such as the college logo) as a soft of beta version of the finished article, before bringing it live. Then you could discuss replacing the current article with the one you've been working on in userspace (i.e. copy+paste the current article into userspace and work on it from there). Or you could just do sections in userspace and place them in article space as you complete them. Here's an example. You would most likely put it somewhere like User:Eliphaletnott/Union College. If you already knew that, even better. Figured it was worth mentioning. upstateNYer 06:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I've been pondering how to start a revision wihout messing up the current version. My editing skills are minimal, to say the least, but I have the "Missing Manual" books plus all of the documentation Wikipedia provides (and is pretty impressive). We are about ready to start some of the sections. Eliphaletnott (talk) 16:42, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, I just copied the UC page to the user space you suggested. Look about right? Eliphaletnott (talk) 15:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. And I didn't take that photo, but I do plan on taking a replacement. I did tweak it to look better though. upstateNYer 16:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

How did you get my userpage beta test site of the UC entry to look like that?Eliphaletnott (talk) 19:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC) By the way, why no fair use images in this space? Eliphaletnott (talk) 19:07, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I copy and pasted the code from the article itself (i.e. click "EDIT" when at the article, then highlight all text in the window, then copy+paste it in your userspace). As for fair use, see the image page of the image and it will tell you that it is used only at Union College. Using it in your userspace is not fair use (there is no reason for it, essentially). Then you would re-add it when you transfer all the text. Any more questions, shoot them my way. Best of luck. upstateNYer 21:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Images

I'm allowing users to compile a list of places for me to take photos this summer. Are there any specific places on campus that you think should have a photo in the article? See here for the list. I'm already planning on a replacement of the current image of the Nott Memorial. upstateNYer 22:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Updates look good

Newest updates to the article look good. I noticed at union.edu, there is a section "Sights and sounds" and a video called Ramée Plan. The image used in that would be absolutely perfect to take the place of the Nott in the infobox. If anybody would be able to do it, I feel somebody on the inside like you could. Not sure who owns the rights, but if it's the College, I feel they should be happy to offer it under Creative Commons so it can be used on WP. What do you think? upstateNYer 02:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Invalid license

Hello, File:Unionaerial2.jpg and File:Unionaeralview.jpg have got an invalid license "granted" by Union college. If this is restricted to non commercial or educational then Wikipedia cannot use it. However, is the image old enough to be public domain? Where did the images come from? Also is there any edidence that the license is granted? The best solution is to find that the images are free and demonstrate it. Talk to me if you need any help here. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The images are from a Union College publication. I am the Library Director at Union, where the publication is housed. The images are also the property of Union, and are held in the archives, which I supervise. So, I didn't really know what to put here. Normally, if permission were asked to repreduce such an image, we would grant it. So, in effect, I gave my self permission. What do you suggest? They are the best images I have of an aerial view. Eliphaletnott (talk) 23:34, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I have all the steps written down for you. Unfortunately I'm on my way out to a restaurant right now, but I'll send you an email on it later. upstateNYer 00:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm working on it. Eliphaletnott (talk) 14:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering that myself. I mean, people who took aerial photographs in the 1950s generally don't edit Wikipedia. ;) Reminds me of a case on Commons where a guy {{pd-self}}'d a 1910 photograph...— DroEsperanto (talk) 17:55, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, that's not entirely true... upstateNYer 04:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Confirm edits

Can you confirm that all the wikilinks I entered into this section are correct? Also, can you confirm that the references that I placed there are also correct? A notes section (while it isn't automatic like {{reflist}}) is very handy because you can reference a note as well. Thanks in advance, upstateNYer 03:13, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, note the comments I will be leaving you. I know it's a pain, but I'm a good person to read this, being an outsider to Union, and these are questions the typical reader would ask. The goal is for the reader to leave without questions or clarifications needed. upstateNYer 03:53, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Excellent image addition

This is a 1000% improvement over the old one. Nice addition! upstateNYer 01:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Moved alumni section to new article

Just so you know, I moved the listing from the alumni section to a new article: List of Union College alumni. The length of the main article was getting too long (and not just from the names, but the references as well). So when you add to the list, add to it at the new article. That should clean up the rewrite you guys have done so well on. Thanks, upstateNYer 19:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for List of Union College alumni

On September 11, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of Union College alumni, 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 05:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Personal attack

Please don't make derogatory comments about other editors, even in edit summaries; I am perfectly capable of counting.

The question is whether the information you have added is actually in the source that is cited. I am guessing "no" because the editor that just added the information said that the information was obtained from another Wikipedia article and not the cited source. If that's indeed the case, your edit is problematic because it's attributing to a source information that is not actually there. --ElKevbo (talk) 20:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I am completely baffled here. The editor who apparently can't count is me. I made a mistake when looking at the original source, and was prompted by the correction concerning UNC to go back and look. In fact, I had left out UNC, and therefore reduced the number. A simple look at the arithmetic would have shown me that the original numbers couldn't be right; they don't add up to the total. So, I restored the correction, because it was needed, and in fact the original source now matches the sentence, when it did not before. Sorry for the confusion. Eliphaletnott (talk) 12:42, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the reply and the explanation! --ElKevbo (talk) 13:44, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

• And thanks for keeping an eye on the entry, for promotional messages. Eliphaletnott (talk) 13:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding. This shows, I think, the way in which Wikipedia entries can, in the ideal case, be rapidly self-correcting. In a printed source, this error would have persisted much longer. Eliphaletnott (talk) 14:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

• I should also like to offer, to anyone working on the tri-city area, that any resources Union College has can be made available, including our Special Collections Department (currently closed, though, for renovation). Eliphaletnott (talk) 18:42, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Union College

On September 26, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Union College, 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 04:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Eliphalet Nott

I noticed your name in the Recent Changes and was amused enough at the prospect of the distinguished professor and minister editing here that I came by your talk page to have a peek. I see you've been busy improving the Union College articles. Any chance of performing your magic on the Eliphalet Nott article itself? I note the unintentional howler there that he was "born an orphan", and that his wife is identified only by her father's name, not her own (Sarah Maria Benedict). I see no sign of his subsequent wives, Gertrude Peebles and Urania Sheldon. Being of a genealogical sort of mind, I'd like a mention of the marriage of his daughter Sarah Maria Nott to Bishop Alonzo Potter. And I would think you'd have all sorts of resources including portraits of his family... - Nunh-huh 16:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

You know what? After I did all that work, I got little to no thanks from various people at the College who should have been appreciative. But, then, I guess that's not why we do these things. Full disclosure: I am the Library Director at Union. My colleague in this project, the Head of Special Collections, goes by the handle of Uranianott. So, you see, we care. After fixing up the main entry, and the alumni list, my plan was to move on to the most important related articles (like the one on Nott). I've just at the moment not had the time, but I think it would be a shame not to. So, they are on my "to do" list, but I thank you for your encouragement!Eliphaletnott (talk) 18:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, employers are rarely as appreciative as they should be. And your fellow editors here often have much in common with such employers! Nonetheless, I will look forward to your efforts on Eliphalet Nott... but I'll fix the "orphan" silliness in the meantime. (I guess we know Uranianott's favorite wife....) - Nunh-huh 18:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Two questions

1. Is it okay if I delete this?

1. • Yes. Eliphaletnott (talk) 14:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
2. Do you guys by any chance have a high-res scan of this? The current version is from a book and you can easily see the dots that make up the image. If you had a good enough quality, higher res jpg of the original print (which I believe you guys have in your collection), it could have a pretty good chance at featured picture candidates. When promoted, these end up on the Main Page for a full day, which could be good press for you.
   • I will check; we may be able to scan the original. Eliphaletnott (talk) 14:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. upstateNYer 02:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Change to List of Union College alumni

Just so you know, I've begun this to keep in line with List of Dartmouth College alumni. The table allows for a reader to order the alumni based on graduation year or last name, which is more efficient than a typical list. Rather than split the alumni based on degree concentration as done for Dartmouth, one large table should be fine. There should be enough room for the images, as shown. If you want to help, that would great. I'm going to do a little at a time until it's done, then replace the current list (there won't be any date range sections). If you need help using the sortname template, see {{sortname}}. upstateNYer 04:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

College ranking template

What do you think of using this in the article: {{Infobox US university ranking}}? upstateNYer 04:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

• Fine, although I don't think I really understand how to format it. The introductory text was simply a way to point readers to the more detailed information about the rankings and methodology on the various web sites. Eliphaletnott (talk) 14:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
  • I think we would put this in the Rankings section so it's a quick see. The bullets we have can go into text. Like I've said previously, the rankings are important to anyone wanting critical information about the place. If you have any more numbers, you can list them here, then I'll put them in later. upstateNYer 21:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Rearrangement

• I am undertaking a more general rearrangement of the entry to conform to the template mentioned in the Talk page of the article. I am also working on the reformatted alumni entry, albeit slowly.Eliphaletnott (talk) 13:50, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Of Union College I assume? upstateNYer 21:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
• Yes. Eliphaletnott (talk) 13:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments pertaining to peer review

First off, I'm happy to see the reviews you got over at the peer review. Usually you're lucky if you only get one that has a little substance. The ones we got are pretty good. Two things right now: I'm updating the sourcing pattern to match that of this article (i.e. Author (year), p. ###). References section for the author and page call out, and Bibliography section for the full citation of the work. Can you complete the citation for the first use of DAB? It lacks publisher, author, ISBN, etc. That would be helpful. And so you know, naming refs can be much easier than how you were doing it. For example, I've replaced all the Somers citations with shorter ones and renamed them (i.e. <ref name=somers593>). This makes it much easier. If the author's name is long, or there's a better way to refer to a work (i.e. dab382, for when we get there), then go for that. Just go with whatever's easier and stay consistent. And consider naming each and every ref, because it may (most likely will) save you time later on (it's a 'just in case' scenario). upstateNYer 05:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

And if something is already in the Bibliography section, it won't be in the Further reading section (just came across Sherwood in FR as I added it to Biblio). Just FYI. upstateNYer 05:50, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

• Like everyone else, I've been very busy with end-of-term grading, etc. I will come back to this now. I can fix the bib. and further reading lists. The DAB I cited is the standard way of referring to the only edition of the work there is, but I can add the other information if it seems important. This was the librarian talking. I can also turn back to the list of alums now. I am happy to see very few substantive changes in the article, although I suspect someone from the institution is modifying a few parts for public relations reasons. Eliphaletnott (talk) 13:36, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
  • If the changes seem to be ill advised per your judgement, feel free to revert the edit. Wikipedia is not censored for any reason, especially PR. upstateNYer 22:37, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

A couple images?

This section could use a photo of the Board of Trustees, if such a photo exists. Also, any update on getting a better scan of the original version of this? ❄ upstateNYer ❄ 17:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

A picture of Stephen Ainlay would also add to the article. ❄ upstateNYer ❄ 01:56, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

• No photo exists of the current BOT, so far as I know; I'll get a photo of the current president and post it.Eliphaletnott (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Is a photo of the Chairman of the Board available? ❄ upstateNYer ❄ 04:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Issues

to fix:

1. Choose which Union Theological Seminary you are referring to here
2. Link to the correct usage of temper you imply in the last sentence of the second paragraph here
3. Joseph-Jacques Ramée has an article, but it contains a hyphen. Have you seen this before? If not, it may be best to move his article to Joseph Jacques Ramée.
4. Undergraduate research needs citations.
5. Last sentence of Library needs a citation.
6. First paragraph of Rankings needs a citation.
7. Clarification needed in the first paragraph of Arts and culture.
8. Confirm that the Dept of Theater and Dance is housed in Yulman Theater (and if not, toss in some replacement verbiage)
9. Theme Houses needs a citation.

❄ upstateNYer ❄ 02:07, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

If these issues are done, we are probably ready to nominate at Good Article Nominations. upstateNYer 19:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

❄ upstateNYer ❄ is wishing you a happy Capital District holiday! Wikiproject Capital District is coming up on one year of successful work. I'd like to thank you for the help and support, and effort to expand the scope of New York's Capital District on Wikipedia. Enjoy your respective holiday and best wishes for the coming new year (especially related to your content work on Wikipedia)!

Question

I've been asked a question about a bridge that may be on your campus (in addition to its designer, a graduate of Union). Would you mind commenting here? Thanks in advance. PS. Long time no see online. It's probably about time to nominate Union College for good article status. Interested? upstateNYer 19:38, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

List rewrite went live

Just so you know, I brought the alumni list live. upstateNYer 21:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)