User talk:Ipoellet/Archive 4

Tax revolt in critical care at a hospital near you

Hello fellow WikiProject Oregon member, once again time for the Collaboration of the Week in the land of Oregon. As always, thank you to those who helped out the last few weeks improving List of films shot in Oregon and Jim Paxson. This week we have by request Oregon tax revolt and not by request, the annual Hospital creation drive. For the later, I have laid out some sources here, and the remaining red links are all over the state, so you can find one near you! As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. May the wind always be beneath your wings. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:National War College - Roosevelt Hall.jpg

File:National War College - Roosevelt Hall.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:National War College - Roosevelt Hall.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:National War College - Roosevelt Hall.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 06:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

It's sunny out, quick take a picture!

Greetings to WikiProject Oregon folks. It is time again for another installment of as the Collaboration Of The Week Turns. A big thank you to last time’s guest stars who worked on Oregon tax revolt‎ and creating hospital articles, we had 3 DYKs off the hospital articles createdd. This week is the star-studded affair of the Semi-annual Great Oregon Picture Drive, starring Ipoellet. You can go out and take a picture, browse through Commons for an existing one, or search for a free one on the Internet, and in some cases remove an old request (or even add a request to an article that has no images). See the bottom of this page for some links to a variety of free sources. Again, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Aboutmovies (talk) 23:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

PayLess at Sprouse-Reitz for your G.I. Joe's, brought to you by Troutman's Emporium and Frederick & Nelson

Hello WikiProject Oregon member, and seasons greetings. Here at Collaboration Of The Week we thank you for your efforts making Oregon better, at least on Wikipedia, and hope you are doing better than Joe's. Or, in the eloquent words of some marketing manager for another now defunct Oregon chain, Merry Christmas from PayLess... Merry Chriiiistmaaaasssss!!!

Now that pleasantries have been exchanged, thank you to those who worked on the last two collaborations, the Semi-annual Great Oregon Picture Drive, and Oregon Country Fair and Geoff Petrie. For this edition of the COTW we have Gambling in Oregon and NRHP in Washington County. The hope for the later is to fill in the last few images (5) and then see if we can make it the first NRHP list in Oregon with an article for every entry (need 27). As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

One last time for 2009

Happy New Year to you, you WikiProject Oregon member! Tis the season for one last Collaboration Of The Week to get started this year. Thank you to those who worked on Gambling in Oregon and NRHP in Washington County the last few weeks. For the final COTW of 2009, we have Archiving Article Talk Pages and Mr. Standard TV & Appliance, Bill Schonely. For the archiving, we have a lot of old, stale comments on article talk pages from before 2009 that should be archived away, so that new comments are not added to things that either were addressed or not worth addressing. Personally, I archive anything older than a year. Anyway, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Adios. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:30, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thumbs up

		The COTW award from WPOR.
		Thanks for leading the way in last week's Collaboration of the Week! For your work on the NRHP list for WaCo a few weeks ago. Aboutmovies (talk) 10:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Oregon COTW v 3.0.2010ish

Greetings WikiProject Oregon team member. Time for the first new Collaboration Of The Week in 2010. Thank you to those who worked on Bill Schonely and archiving talk pages. For this week, we have Concordia University and the Berry Botanic Garden. Hopefully we can mine the garden’s website before it closes down. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Cheers and stuff. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Just Out, COTW does well in new decade

Howdy WikiProject Oregon folks, time again for the latest installment of As the Collaboration Of The Week Turns. Last week was one of the more successful COTWs in recent memory as we really worked hard as a community to improve Concordia University and Berry Botanic Garden. Both are now at least C class articles and nicely illustrated (thanks to Tedder, Finetooth, and Ipoellet). Plus it really was a group effort as we had five different WPORE editors work on the garden and ditto with the school, with some overlap between the two.

Anyway, this week, we have by request the completely unrelated Just Out and Terrell Brandon. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. This message paid for by Fooians against COTW killing taxes. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Salem (Amtrak station) on NRHP

I heard it here first! I don't think the S-J has even covered this yet. Thanks for keeping the list updated. Katr67 (talk) 12:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Oregon COTW and randomness

Greetings fellow WikiProject Oregon member, it is once again time for the Collaboration of the Week (yes, I know they are not actually every week anymore). Thank you to those who helped out the last few weeks improving Terrell Brandon, Just Out, 75th Oregon Legislative Assembly, and all the unreferenced BLPs. This week we have by request Oregon Coast Aquarium and Arvydas Sabonis (maybe the Blazers can sign him as I think he's healthy). Both need more sourcing. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. And remember folks, the only thing we have to fear is death and taxes, unless of course the dingo ate your baby, at which point you may feel the need, the for speed to get away from said dingos, which in turn can lead to a failure to communicate due to the dynamics of sound waves, though at some point hopefully we can all just get along. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

disambig note

Thanks for helping on Public Service Building disambiguation and another one or two. For that one, you removed the supporting bluelinks that go with primary red-link NRHP items on the dab page. I restored those. The relevant guideline is at MOS:DABRL. Technically, the supporting bluelinks that point to a state-wide NRHP list are not in perfect compliance; they should point to the specific county- or city-level NRHP list-article that shows the same red-link in context. But, there is a bot under development that will go around and refine those supporting bluelinks, so I am not going to bother with refining them (also, the supporting bluelink is to be de-linked when an article is created, anyhow). So please leave the supporting bluelinks in place, thanks! --doncram (talk) 21:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I see where MOS:DABRL allows for some supporting information for each disambig entry that would not otherwise be appropriate - thank you. However, MOS:DABRL does not actually address the main concerns I had with that page, and your revert put those problems right back in place. In descending order of urgency, those issues are:

• Your use of the initialism "NRHP", which is not in general use outside Wikipedia and Commons editorial circles, just like the old debate about "Registered Historic Place". That it's used at all on many disambiguation pages is problematic. That it is so often used without antecedent (i.e. without "National Register of Historic Places" ever spelled out and connected to the "NRHP" initialism) is directly inconsistent with MOS:ABBR and unacceptable.
• Your use of postal abbreviations for some states, which is also addressed at MOS:ABBR.
• In light of MOS:DABRL, I'm okay using piped links on these disambig pages in order to make them flow rhetorically, even though piped links are generally discouraged by MOS:DAB. However, that the piped links in turn link to redirects is just sort of wild.

So thanks for pointing out MOS:DABRL, but I've had to go ahead and correct your reverts once again. —Ipoellet (talk) 23:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Your edit here is fine by me, thanks! I agree both that spelling out National Register of Historic Places at least once on a page is needed (and everytime is okay too) and spelling out postal abbreviations is good too. I don't feel strongly enough about it to go, myself, and make those same fixes on all 2000 or so disambiguation pages involving NRHP entries now, though. Maybe sometime a bot can address that too, after refining the supporting bluelinks. Thanks. --doncram (talk) 00:48, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

If the bot is refining, can't it spell out at the same time? Lvklock (talk) 16:25, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

It would be simple for the same or a different bot to expand out NRHP in every displayed instance in disambiguation pages in the NRHP disambiguation pages category, but not as simple for it to just expand out the first instance. Actually, I meant to follow up and assert the problem is not as extensive as my comment above suggested: NRHP has been spelled out at least once, and all postal codes have been expanded out, in many if not most of the disambiguation pages involving NRHPs already. Again, i think of this as a formatting issue, perhaps important but not as important as defending the basic presence of the redlink NRHP entries from those who would delete them inappropriately. The whole NRHP disambiguation process has consumed too much attention due to the redlinks and related misunderstandings; i am inclined to ask seriously at wt:NRHP for a drive to create stub articles for all of them. But i'll reference this discussion at the wp:bot request now so that the abbreviations issue can be possibly addressed sooner. --doncram (talk) 16:42, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Broadway Hotel

Hi. I just wanted to let you know I added your photo of the Broadway Hotel to the John Virginius Bennes article. Have you ever come across the Vinton Building? I find it intriguing because I haven't seen it noted anywhere but in a library collection of Bennes's sketches, and there's a very famous Vinton Building in Detroit. This blog has a shot of the side signage and gives a date of 1925. Anyway, I just think it's kind of fun to try and track down lost things. I saw some interior shots of the Broadway Hotel earlier (I think that's what I saw anyway) and it looked very cool. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Glad to know one of my pics was of use. You might be interested to know that there are also some detail shots of that building on the Commons: here and here.

I am not familiar with the Vinton Building (not the Portland one - I did know of the Detroit one), but I was able to locate it on Google Earth using the info in that blog post. Next time I'm down in that area, I'll grab a snap of it and upload it for you. —Ipoellet (talk) 01:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Cool. The Broadway Hotel (Portland, Oregon) article you started looks good. Tedder and I were discussing a couple other Portland "hotels" by Bennes on his talk page if you're interested. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:03, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I started an article on William C. Knighton and added one of your photos there as well. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:HighSteelBridge.jpg

Thanks for letting me know. I've sent evidence of permission as requested. travisl (talk) 06:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

cn on which part?

• Context: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shaniko,_Oregon&curid=130995&diff=347928760&oldid=343673248

It's a long sentence- you're looking for a cite for the population, the ghost town, the Pamplin part, or all of the above? Not complaining, just looking for clarification. tedder (talk) 19:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Taking some guidance from WP:LEADCITE, I'd say most of the paragraph is unlikely to be challenged and is probably adequately referenced elsewhere in the article. But the part about Pamplin should be referenced, since (a) ongoing civic activities like his are prone to spawning disputes and competing claims for credit, (b) it's about a living person and NObody wants to get caught up in the BLP mess, even periperally, and (c) Pamplin himself is a mildly controversial figure in some circles. The characterization of Shaniko as a "ghost town" also bugs me - it's not a serious transgression at all, but it is nevertheless very faintly suggestive of POV, and could probably stand to be put beyond dispute. I believe both the Pamplin stuff and the ghost town stuff are right on and should stay in the article, but they do need citation. —Ipoellet (talk) 20:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha. Yeah, the Pamplin thing shouldn't only be in the lede- or shouldn't be in the lede at all. Maybe when Katr comes back she can redo that. tedder (talk) 20:25, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Visual edition of the Oregon COTW featuring the Glass Palace

Hello WikiProject Oregon member, time for a new edition of the Collaboration of the Week. Thank you to those who helped out the last few weeks improving Oregon Coast Aquarium and Arvydas Sabonis. Also thank you to those few of you helped with the attempt to celebrate Women's History Month with Barbara Roberts and Ursula K. Le Guin.

This week we have by request the Memorial Coliseum that has been in the news a lot lately, and then one of the more important political figures in our state's history, Douglas McKay. The MC needs some ref work and EL work, and McKay really needs a lot more sourcing. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Aboutmovies (talk) 20:04, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Re:List of National Parks of the United States

Thank you very much!! It means a lot to me to get some recognition for my work. Any comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of National Parks of the United States/archive1, and you may also be interested in my previous article List of National Monuments of the United States. Reywas92^Talk 22:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Fulton–Taylor House, Fulton-Taylor House

A few days ago, you created Fulton-Taylor House as a redirect to Fulton–Taylor House. When I noticed that Fulton–Taylor House didn't yet exist, I quickly put together a stub for it. Could you please take a look at that article and expand it if you have access to information that would allow you to do so? Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:45, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Oops. I certainly meant to create that stub and not leave that redirect hanging out there. I guess I forgot what I was doing partway through. I've added a few references and made some formatting changes, but your stub certainly covered most of what I would put in a stub. Thanks! —Ipoellet (talk) 04:39, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

IP, do you have the nominations for those NHRP sites? Or are you just using the database summary? tedder (talk) 04:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Some of the nominations I have, most I don't. For most NRHP listings, I have no better way to lay my hands on the nomination form than to e-mail the NPS, place the request, and wait several days while they process it. (They say they have all the Oregon nominations scanned, and are just doing a QC process before putting them up on NPS Focus. I wish they'd hurry up.) If I do have a relevant nomination form, then I always cite it in the references of any stub I put together, and usually also in the county lists. I don't, unfortunately, have the uninterrupted time available to write anything more substantial than a stub, which is why I normally restrict myself to photography and the county lists. —Ipoellet (talk) 04:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm impressed with the work you've done. I just wanted to know your strategy. I've asked for forms from the Oregon's SHPO in the past, but I've been waiting for over a week on the most recent one. What's the web page/contact info for the email to NPS? tedder (talk) 04:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - I normally think of what I've done as very bare-bones, so it's good to see someone else thinks it has value. Instructions for making requests of the NPS are at http://www.nps.gov/nr/research/index.htm toward the bottom. I have tried using the SHPO as a resource, but they are often sloooow or altogether nonresponsive: I suspect it's because they're understaffed. NPS has farmed this sort of response out to contractors, and they therefore have more personnel-hours available. But, yeah, if I don't have the nomination form then I'm just relying on the databases and the SHPO's PDF list. —Ipoellet (talk) 05:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Publishing a photo

Hi Ipoellet,

I was contacted by a newspaper, which would like to publish one of your photos (this one). The terms of the CC-BY-SA license would require them to credit you by your Commons name, "Werewombat." They would prefer to credit you with a real name (I suspect that something like a first name/last initial would probably be fine too).

Could you let me know if this would be acceptable, or what arrangement would work for you? Seeing your extensive collection of Oregon photos, they expressed interest in knowing your preference in general, in case they ever want to publish a different photo of yours.

I see you don't have email enabled on your account. If you'd like to contact me privately, please use peteforsyth.com/contact to contact me by email or phone. I'd be happy to put the two of you in touch directly, if you'd like.

Thank you -- and just in general, thanks for all your excellent contributions :) -Pete (talk) 19:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Cool! I'll be sure to get in touch with you. —Ipoellet (talk) 14:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)