User talk:Rschen7754/Archive 10

Templates

You might want to let Splat know at his new name, User talk:Must eat worms. --NE2 01:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I sure thought that was suspicious... --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• I strongly opposed on deleting those exit lsit templates. They exist for this purpose. See WT:CASH. You cannot simply copy and paste items from this to that on exit list. Please keep those exit lsit tempaltes.--57Freeways 02:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Things are not kept on Wikipedia just because you want them to be. --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• • You know we had a war over I-5, I-80 and US 101 articles,and Scott5114 had to protect them to stop warring.--57Freeways 02:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter

I'll have to admit, I'm sad to see it go. I suppose the only thing that kept me from editing it was not being able to find anything useful for it. ----DanTD (talk) 03:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter, Issue 6 (FINAL ISSUE)

—Rschen7754bot (talk) 03:50, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Must eat worms

Must eat worms (talk · contribs) seems to be former Splat5572 and Splat5572 was former of Dabby. Do Must eat worms seem to be a sock, they have similar editing patterns.--57Freeways 22:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Response

I don't see no directions on that page; show me such "directions" Must eat worms (talk) 23:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

oppose I-110 merge

I thought I-110 should not merge, even when Harbor Frwy is SR 110 between i-10 and US 101 the signs I post on the talkpage says I-110 South from Four Level Interchange. Gaffey St shows no SR 110 on the signs.--57Freeways 01:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are saying. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

harbor and Pasadnea Frwys should not be emrge. Even the talkpage say it should not.--57Freeways 02:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I-110 article should only be able align south of Four Level Interchange. The sign from US 101 say i-110 South.--57Freeways 02:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

[1] and [2]. I don't know why NE2 say those signs ara wrong.--57Freeways 02:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk to NE2 on this one; I was out most of the summer and don't know what went on. --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:16, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 37	15 September 2008	About the Signpost

Wikiquote checkuser found to be sockpuppeteer	WikiWorld: "Ubbi dubbi"
News and notes: Wikis Takes Manhattan, milestones	Dispatches: Interview with Ruhrfisch, master of Peer review
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Response

It's actually for helping USRD since your content is more of a USRD-type material and not a User:Rschen7754 material. And even if you threaten to block me, I will just ask to have the block reviewed because I know that's not a good reason to block people. Also, you touch my userspace plenty of times. Must eat worms (talk) 00:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Go look at the policy for userpages. I actually have a legitimate reason to touch your userspace to add legitimate sock templates. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Point to that policy please. Must eat worms (talk) 00:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for John Pemberton (anthropologist)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of John Pemberton (anthropologist). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. lifebaka++ 16:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for making the DRV relatively painless, it's always better when they go like that. Happy editing! lifebaka++ 23:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Well you folks may be all and well happy as you seem with the process but where the hell one actually deal with the issues regarding such a vague and unhelpful reason for deletion 'may or not may be notable?' - THE afd and the DRV gives a rather circular locked in a cupboard at the bottom of the stair feeling to this process - ?? SatuSuro 02:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

If you have any understanding at all of the Indonesian project for example - one month is a pointless criteria WP:NODEADLINES and such a deletion in the context of that porject for instance would be out of order - I have to wait a year sometimes for some issues to resolve :) SatuSuro 02:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I am getting quite confused as to who did what - I consider the article undeletable because of his contribution to an issue rarely found in the english langauge and a seriously poor afd decision and lack of understanding by either nominator or editor creating the article as to the context of the indivudual in javanese studies SatuSuro 03:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion policy - this went (relatively) according to policy. --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

So? where to now? a group of editors who know nothing about Indonesia decided it was not notable - I have since asserted that his book of 1994 was an important publishing event regarding javanese studies - where does it go now? SatuSuro 05:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Which article are you talking about? John Pemberton, right? --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes SatuSuro 05:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

State your case at the AFD and wait for others to give their input. The working style of the Indonesia project does not matter - it's Wikipedia policy that there's only 5-7 days for an AFD. After that, it is closed out. If you have a problem with that, take it to the AFD people and get it changed; I'm just enforcing policy. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey at least thanks for getting to the afd - I appreciate that - its a thankless task either way I say and I wasnt having a go at you personally - there were a group of about 6-8 american academics who did field work in Java in the 1980's and 1990's who are essential reading for the understanding of Javanese and Indonesian culture in the last years of suharto's new order - and I hold with deep suspicion the relatively narrow view of eds who cannot even think to put project notifications on speedies or afds in relevant projects - he wrote a book java - all it needed was a listing there - to have it at living american academics was a furphy! but thanks anyways. As for general xfd/ xfr etc sorry to say but it stinks - sloppy work all around by many SatuSuro 05:33, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Holland Tunnel

You had failed the Holland Tunnel article in a B-class audit, citing sourcing issues. I have added sources for nearly every statement in the article, and expanded the text where appropriate, which should address your concerns. Any suggestions on getting this article past B-class would be appreciated. Alansohn (talk) 15:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The main thing would be to remove the trivia section. After that, it would be time to start looking at the GA criteria and polishing the article. --Rschen7754 (T C) 16:50, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Blog

Aren't blogs supposed to have comments below? --NE2 10:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

... yeah I suppose this one could. Reverting... --Rschen7754 (T C) 18:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

St. Anthony Falls (35W) Bridge

You reclassified St. Anthony Falls (35W) Bridge as C-class with the summary, "sourcing issues". Could you be more specific about what work you think needs to be done?. Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 15:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

It needs more sources. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

34 sources for a 19 kilobyte article? Please add {{cn}} on any statements that you feel are inadequately sourced.--Appraiser (talk) 23:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Looking at it, it was my mistake - I found many of the B-class articles substandard and must have demoted that one by mistake. Apologies for that. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 14:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yildun Internet Backup

Dear Rschen7754,

I have noticed that my article about Yildun Internet Backup was recently deleted due to it not being written in an encyclopedic jargon.

However, I do not find many differences between my article and some others that deal with more or less the same subject.

Could you please explain to me what makes a text commercial and what not? In my article I just wanted to explain the new technology that Yildun Internet Backup applies.

Thank you very much for your help,

Glosolii

Glosolii ca (talk) 14:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Spam. --Rschen7754 (T C) 16:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. However, I would like to know which are the criterias that are violated in my article in order for it to be rewritten properly. Thank you for your help and time. Glosolii ca (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't even seem notable (Wikipedia:Notability.) Wikipedia is not a web directory. --Rschen7754 (T C) 08:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Well I don't really understand what is notable to be in Wikipedia and what is not, but I think this technology is important and, at least, widely known in Spain to have an article. Even Google uses the technology. Could you please specify what is the exact reason why the article was deleted? Many thanks, once again.

Glosolii ca (talk) 15:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:NPOV, WP:SPAM, etc. --Rschen7754 (T C) 17:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand, however, I don't think that these policies are always applied in the same way. For example, there's another backup system called Mozy, that has a totally commercial article on wikipedia, with even the prices of the service on it, so this should be catalogued as Spam as well. I do not know how to explain that this technology I am talking about in my article deserves to be known, because is new and really interesting.

Glosolii ca (talk) 13:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Drama

I recommend you ignore the Durova/Shoemaker's Holiday crowd Mitchazenia seems to have befriended. They remind me of politicians, slinging mud whenever it helps their buddies. User talk:NE2#A peace offering struck me as a bribe. (And yes, I understand the above could be interpreted as mud-slinging, but that was not my intent.) --NE2 12:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah... well it's not just them that's causing the problems. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, AL2TB/75.47/Freewayguy too...I'd probably support some sort of editing restriction on them. --NE2 03:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

As for your essay... well put. I arrived here too late to witness the "old crowd" drama and didn't submerge myself in the recent developments, but whatever the case, it is rather silly that this is happening at all, with the ever-changing moniker of AL2TB, NYSR or what have you. Hopefully you can work on California and get it back up to what it once was and bypass everything else CL — 04:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks... it's not just AL2TB that's a factor... it's rather minor in this. --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sock puppetry

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/I-210 --I-210 (talk) 00:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Do not accuse me of sockpuppetry again

Do not accuse me again; that's just rude. I doesn't make anyone like you to go around attack me everytime you anwser that on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/I-210 that i'm a sockpuppet for AL2TB which definitely almost certinly even not true. --I-210 (talk) 04:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Apologies; you're apparently the 75 IP. --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Protection of I-210's talkpage

Did you mean to fully protect I-210's talkpage? I think you post the wrong level of semi-protection, I thought your ultimate intention is to fully protect it, because the protect summary is to stop abuse of urging for unblock.--SCFReeways 00:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I meant to semiprotect. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Your essay

I pretty much agree with what you have said in your essay and I guess at age 29, I am one of the senior citizens of the project. The constant arguing and the fact that I am out of the country until March with little chance to get online is why I am currently on an extended break. I reserve hope that when I return, things will be better, but it seems like it has been SSDD for a few years now. Oh well, one can always hope I suppose. Thanks for all you do. --Holderca1 ^talk 16:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Why thanks! --Rschen7754 (T C) 17:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

FACR

Rschen7754/Archive 10, you posted at one or more of the recent discussions of short FAs. There's now a proposal to change the featured article criteria that attempts to address this. Please take a look and consider adding your comments to the straw poll there. Mike Christie (talk) 19:52, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

75.47.0.0/16

Has an abuse report been filed on this guy? He's been blocked a total of five times--even though AT&T hasn't exactly been responsive to complaints about abuse on Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Mmbabies), we can't keep this many users in LA blocked from editing forever. Blueboy96 22:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

No - the range has been blocked anon-only so that people can get an account to edit. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Response now available

You can send me the response, now available for the next two days. Thanks again, Sswonk (talk) 23:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Response sent. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

No longer available. Sswonk (talk) 03:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

San Diego Frwy

What's wrong with you lately. This might be disturbing but I have to ask this, because I just made tiny typos and you undo everything, this is too harsh, you can at least fix it. And why you undo my changes to San Diego Fwy. I thought the deal was to keep it merge with I-405 becuase most info contains I-405, we should avoid mentioning control city and major cities. They sound like Interstate-Guide. Also we have little to write about i-5.--Freewayguy 02:40, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I am not your parent. It is not my duty to clean up after you. If you make a bad edit and reverting would make it better, I will revert, even if it's not perfect. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

• I don't have that much expier. Usually, some tools is new to me. For San Diego Frwy all I done is fw to I-405 since the page is superflow. I post the comments on talkpage, if it's not effective enough, what's better way to get people's attention? most of Sna Diego Fwy is I-405 stuff and only little I-5 stuff.--Freewayguy 22:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Your question about User:Eaxgwb6643

Yes. Fritzpoll (talk) 08:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

75.47.0.0/16

When you block 75.47.0.0/16, please block his ability to edit his talk page. This sockpuppeteer has been using his IP talk pages to make repeated unblock requests. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of IBM WebSphere Commerce

I made this page IBM WebSphere Commerce and you have just fast deleted it as advertisement. Please can you restore it, or tell me why my page has been deleted without any warning. If it had too many external links, then perhaps this could have been edited. Thanks a lot in advance 193.77.212.213 (talk) 19:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)MojcaS

Just from reading the first few sentences you can tell it's written like an ad. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Please can you restore the page and I will rewrite it or change first few sentences to explain what this product is about. Other WebSphere products are there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.77.212.213 (talk) 05:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I can give you a copy of the text, but the article will likely need a complete rewrite. You need to adhere to WP:NPOV as well. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you give me your contact please, or if you restore page I can try to rewrite as you say in couple of weeks or so. Thanks, MojcaS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.77.212.213 (talk) 21:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

You can email me with the "Email this user" link on my user page. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I would if there was such a link there. What is your email please? Thanks, MojcaS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.77.212.213 (talk) 16:56, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

You need to create an account then. I'm not giving out my email address on wiki. --Rschen7754 (T C) 17:37, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I already have an account. Can you mail me this page please. Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by MojcaS (talk • contribs) 21:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

San Diego Freeway

This page has to be merge, this was discuss on WT:CASH, NE2 and Gateman agree on merge. Why should this be kept a seperate, any specific ration, like Golden State Fwy, San Diego Fwy does not have meaningful contents to kept a sperate page.--Freewayguy 23:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

• Can you just discuss on talkpage rahter than just blank undoing. I put the matter on discuss page, waiting for people to talk, I don't see people commenting. WHat should I do to get users faster attention?--Freewayguy 23:05, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

• Or I should tag by {{Mergefrom}} and {{Mergeto}} will be feasible. Holderca1 said keeping the tag for 60 minutes is not enough, when I merge I have to tag it for at least a week, I did discuss it on talkpage.--Freewayguy 23:12, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

• Just answer this What you meant by having a consensus.--Freewayguy 23:29, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Returning vandal

Thanks for rapidly blocking User:Pioneer prefered Lewinsky. I am sure it was a return of the famous User:Pionier. Please see the other IPs on that page, for he will return in about 3 days. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 15:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, except I wasn't the one who blocked... --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

SAn Diego Fwy

you said to merge it earilier, why you keep undoing it. I put {{Merge}} tag on that page. Until when can I make action, how long is it enough for tag to stay to merge--Freewayguy 22:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Why you never answer this question. If you undo, I want you to expalin. I want you to give us your opinion.--Freewayguy 03:12, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Fine, I did. Are you happy now? --Rschen7754 (T C) 06:29, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

If I want to RR, I have to use Merge or go through AFD?--FRWY 19:28, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I do not understand, Please explain

I do not understand why you keep deleting my links. Please explain this as these are pertinent to the subject and should be allowed. MtnsourceMtnsource (talk) 07:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Just because it's relevant doesn't mean we link to it. Both of these are spam links - one is a guy's personal home page and the second is ... (well it doesn't even load for me, but it appears to be promoting a commercial business.) Both violate WP:SPAM and WP:EL. They have no place in the article. Wikipedia is not an internet directory or a repository for external links. --Rschen7754 (T C) 08:05, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

These are NOT SPAM LINKS! The "guy's homepage" is a story about a man who is 102 years old who has lived on the mountain for over 80 years. He will be replaced with a different story soon. If you looked further, you would see that this is a source book for the mountains. Click on the Community Services for futher info. The other site (which loads for me) is an addition to the source book with info about living in the mountains. The other link you did leave Hiway17.com is an advertisement for a realtor. Mtnsource (talk) 16:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Inclusion of one spam link is not justification for the inclusion of another - there is a specific section saying this at WP:SPAM. Have you even read the policy? Arguing why it is relevant to the topic does no good - you need to tell me how it fits the criteria at WP:EL and WP:SPAM. --Rschen7754 (T C) 16:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

GAN backlog elimination drive barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		Well done for your work during the GAN backlog elimination drive. Peanut4 (talk) 19:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Why thanks! --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Neccessairly of undos?

You have been mena to me lately can you explain why you just do these, elime state name from IA 25/20px, only having state-name on 70px signs. Why on OK, CA, AZ I elime state/specific you undo them back. Agreement is to not use state-name specific on 25/20px at all. I'm confuse on why to use state/specific on icons for other statesnot IA.--FRWY 00:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Please restate this in English. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I don't understand what you menat. What's unclear, the comment or the summary, of why I elime or add the state-name.--FRWY 00:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you forgive me for my booboos?You seem to hurt my feelings right now by unrationable undos, and I don't know why? We had discussion over interstate markers to not use state/specifi on 25/20 px, I don't just hear from one people even Jeff said to avoid state-specific markers on 25x20px. You can't even see the state name over a icon so small. I can improve myself on those following.

1. To avoid messing up tables I can use sandbox, to keep playing on my sandbox, until I think I am satisfy with it.

2.For comments double check to avoid spelling mistakes.

3. if I ant to white-out of delete an article by #REDIRECT [[AAA]] i still go through normal AFD to be certain people agrees with plan.--FRWY 01:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

That would help, but your editing is still unacceptable. Your editing is hurting the encyclopedia. We have tried for many months to help you. We have failed. However, we have come to a point where if you cannot actually help the encyclopedia, we will have to block you in order to protect it. In fact, there are quite a few editors telling me that you should be blocked. --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• Why is my changes still unacceptable, I hadn't made any slurs at all so far. Is this because I lack patience?Biggest problem? I honestly don't car the place people lives, so I don't know their time zones.--FRWY 03:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • You don't seem to realize that people have school and work and can't just sit around and do what you want. They also want to work on their own states. --Rschen7754 (T C) 03:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• • This not only happen on highway article but also happen on astronomy? I don't seem to have flying off handle on highways lately, but did you meant by what happen at science desk lately, by constantly concerning my astronomy questions and forcing people to answer them instnatly?--FRWY 03:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Nobody cares redux

This discussion? I don't know what the chart means, why it is being promoted and what its future use will be. Were the previous discussions just a dream? Sswonk (talk) 23:01, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Apparently they're arguing about state name shields. I honestly don't care about something so trivial; I'm trying not to follow that discussion. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:53, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Moved from top

Is this edit by another one of your fanclub? DMacks (talk) 21:32, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Please follow directions and start a new section - I had to look at the history to figure out where this post was. Yes, this is I-210 - I am considering doing a range block on a smaller scale to try and stop this from happening. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Your "please start new section for old issues" box isn't until after a screen and a half of other material. Not a standard request and not easy to notice. DMacks (talk) 21:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, I would support such a range-block. So much time having to be wasted on this guy! DMacks (talk) 21:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Freewayguy

Hi. Can you help me telling how many SPs does Freewayguy have? Because in it.wiki he was making a lot of damnages!!! I have blocked him for indefinite time, but I think (I fear) he has others SPs in our wikipedia. Thanks a lot! --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 04:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

[3] - I think he moved on somewhere else. I think all the socks were created here. (Also I think that a page move of a user didn't get reverted over there.) Apologies for the damage caused by spillover from enwp. --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Commons tags in infoboxes

Just out of curiosity, why have you been removing commons tags from road-related infoboxes? I was looking forward to seeing more of them in other types of infoboxes, especially railroad-related ones. ----DanTD (talk) 15:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

FAC hates it. --Rschen7754 (T C) 17:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Spelling

You might want to fix your "edit summary" box in AWB to read "deprecated" --NE2 21:34, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks... --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Google Maps

I understand the copyright policy here, and am currently looking over the links.

If you would kindly explain in respect of each link to Google Maps, why each specfic link is acceptable, then maybe perhaps this conflict of understanding can be resolved in a polite manner. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:33, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

... apparently you don't. I've checked in with a few other administrators and they seem to concur with me. I don't need to explain each specific one - citing a source is not a violation of copyright. If that were the case, I would have been sent to my principal / provost's office and been expelled. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Above comments withdrawn , following a discussion which took place on IRC, It appears there was a slight conflict of understanfing on my part. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

see my comment about maps

hey, might gov't maps be in public domain? This is very definitely worth finding out! Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 13:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

help

Please could you just delete all that conversation I had on here last night. I would be ever so gratfull. I am a bit embarrased by it all. That's all I wanted to do. 78.145.75.115 (talk) 07:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.

Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 42	8 November 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
News and notes: The Price is Right, milestones	Dispatches: Halloween Main Page contest generates new article content
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 43	10 November 2008	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens: Over $500,000 raised in first week	ArbCom elections: Nominations open
Book review: How Wikipedia Works	MediaWiki search engine improved
Four Board resolutions, including financials, approved	News and notes: Vietnamese Wiki Day
Dispatches: Historic election proves groundbreaking on the Main Page	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 44	17 November 2008	About the Signpost

Lawsuit briefly shuts down Wikipedia.de	GFDL 1.3 released, will allow Wikimedia migration to Creative Commons license
Wikimedia Events Roundup	News and notes: Fundraiser, List Summary Service, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:39, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Washington State Route 409 GAN

All of your concerns on the Washington State Route 409 GAN have been met. ~~ ComputerGuy 19:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

India routes

It was a mistake, I really sorry for that... Thanks for taking care of it Devessh S N Bhatta (talk) 21:38, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

FreeWayGuy

After new evidence and analysis from cross-wiki checkusers, it is now most likely to say that FWG is not User:I-210 or any one of the sockpuppets at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of I-210. You may wish to reconsider your block if you were blocking FWG based on edits of the formerly suspected sockpuppets. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I am not - Freewayguy was blocked for one reason, and I-210 was blocked for another. Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between the two; but if I am certain that the sock is either one of the two, then I block. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

That being said, thank you for your continued help in this situation. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Your call, Rschen7754, as you're the admin on the scene. I am just trying to clarify the nature of the relationship, or lack thereof, between the parties. Thanks! -- Avi (talk) 23:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't I-210 75.47? --NE2 00:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Correct. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

They seem to have same behaviour. I noticed them both on Commons, first I thought a possible good/bad sockpuppeting. It turned up that Freewareguy and I-210 weren't the same, however that's the "technical evidence" I believe. Might be more of a history then we know. --Kanonkas :  Talk  19:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Rschen7754/ACEScores2008

You seem to have gone into a great length to calculate the worthiness of each candidate. I am impressed. Keep up the good work! -- Cat ^chi? 12:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

Archiving isn't always about an attempt to remove something from public display. AN/I actually does have a purpose, and the post had a purpose that could have been addressed at AN/I. However, User:Una Smith has made it clear she will not addressed the AN/I issues raised there, and the main issue has been dealt, and the thread is being used now to discuss article issues, which belong in article space. At this point, archiving would stop a thread that no longer is serving any purpose at AN/I.

It's always a little strange to me that Wikipedians toss WP:AGF around, but seldom assume anything but poor or off-tangent motives to the actions of any other editor.

What a strange conclusion, that I asked for a thread to be archived to avoid further publicity.

--KP Botany (talk) 22:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

No can do. Once it makes ANI, it stays there until the bot takes it away. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That's incorrect, threads are closed archived all of the time on AN/I. See this for an example on the board right now while you're telling me otherwise. That's where I got the idea, from an archived AN/I thread. --KP Botany (talk) 23:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Closed is not equal to archived. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I asked for it to be archived, and now, I see, you're the one who instead of answering my request, said it can't be closed. Well, I didn't ask for it to be closed. I asked for it to be archived. Are we really having this discussion? --KP Botany (talk) 23:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

NY 474

If you think I have no idea how to do it, please show me. The technical aspect of review may be be clear to me but the article does meet all 6 criteria, in my opinion. Thank you for your help. Chergles (talk) 19:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

It is very important that you learn how to review articles properly - the technical aspect is very important - you made a mess of the system. If you can't do the technical aspect properly, then please don't review GAs. Use {{GAList2}} to organize your review. --Rschen7754 (T C) 20:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Freewayguy?

Emerald405 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) --NE2 02:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Correct. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Nonstandard Section

I agree with you Rschen7754. I noticed another user placing a seperate section for the routes. I was just continuing his work. Making a simple sentence would suffice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cello06 (talk • contribs) 07:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Shields

Why are you restoring the shields? Those routes are not signed. Only the route names should remain. --Mgillfr (talk) 02:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I've seen the shields for the San Diego County ones myself (the routes are signed), so the shields should be displayed there. Otherwise, I do see the point - but you would need to take it up at WT:ELG. --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you mean county shields signed like this (i.e. SR 78 at El Camino Real) [4]? I thought that on freeway segments, we only include what is displayed on BGS like this [5]. --Mgillfr (talk) 05:02, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

ELG says "guide signs" not BGS. Since these routes are signed, the shields should stay.

Routes should always be included in the exit text (destination) column, whereas other stuff not on the BGS should not go in the destination column. That being said, the ELG page could probably use a clarification on this. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:21, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem is there's tons of gray area here. What I _try_ to do is if the route is signed, use the shield, even if it's not signed on the BGS. If the route is unsigned list it in parands next to the text. However, there's plenty of gray area as to what is/is not signed. I've seen several routes that are signed only at the end, but not any junctions, etc. Also I've seen routes that were unsigned, but after maintenance, suddenly shields appear, and vice-versa. I've also seen routes that are signed in one direction, but not the other. IMO it's not worth a guideline or edit warring. IMO if you're working on an exit list for a route, make your best effort. If you see an exit list that is incorrect, if it's a minor error (such as shield present on an unsigned route) and only one or two of them, I'd let it be. Dave (talk) 06:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I-5 (CA) rewrite

Okay, I'm fine with your re-write, as I see you might want to just refine the prose. However, I don't know why would you like to remove the references I added. Those are reliable sources as they are maps taken from the respective websites. Explain why those refs should not be added. --Mgillfr (talk) 19:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

You don't need them. You can just cite a map. Those references are superfluous and not necessary. GAN, ACR, and FAC will not accept articles like that.

For examples of what the articles are supposed to look like, see California State Route 78 and Interstate 70 in Utah. Most of the California articles use the wrong formatting. --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

For SR 78 (CA) why do names belong in RD? They summarize the route as a whole, and many CASH articles put the names in the lead. --Mgillfr (talk) 19:38, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

No, it goes in the route description. The names don't summarize the history - thus they may summarize the route as a whole, but for it to go in the lead, it has to summarize the article as a whole. Many CASH articles are deviant from USRD standards and have to be corrected - thanks to many deviant editors and my lack of time to clean up after these deviant editors. --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:41, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

So how does this still belong to the lead and summarize the article as a whole? I only see it summarize the route only:

“ This route is part of the California Freeway and Expressway System and is eligible for the State Scenic Highway System. ”

--Mgillfr (talk) 19:47, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

For that, it may be good to consult WT:USRD - I don't feel comfortable with that in the lead because of the citations (since you're not really supposed to have citations in the lead). But it doesn't exactly seem to mesh with the Route description either. --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

That probably should go in the description, maybe as part of a first paragraph describing the route as a whole. --NE2 19:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

And there we go :P The legislative names should probably go there too. --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

If at all...does anyone really care that a 5-mile section is named the State Trooper Nathan Edgars II Memorial Highway? --NE2 19:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I personally think it depends. If New England Route 2 is about 10 miles long, then maybe the name on a 5-mile segment is notable. But in this case, that name obviously doesn't even exist - because if the name really was Nathan Edgars II "Memorial" Highway, you wouldn't be here anymore. Mgillfr (talk) 19:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

What should matter is whether anyone uses the name. For an example of what I'm talking about, see the end of California State Route 99#Local changes. --NE2 20:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 01:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

California SR 65 Talk page

I saw in this diff's edit summary you stated you removed the discussion because it was "not related to the article". Not that it matters a whole lot, but IMHO it was related. Sunrise Blvd in Sacramento and Citrus Heights was a planned portion of SR 65, but it was never fulfilled. The second half of my post on that page was about the historic routing of SR 65 through Roseville. I don't see how those posts could be considered "unrelated" to the topic of the article. Killiondude (talk)

It's not to the topic of the article; it's to the article itself. Talk pages are not a forum for discussion of the article's subject. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Well I could see how one might get the impression it wasn't about the article itself, but my post about the freeway going through Roseville (the old routing) was my attempt to ask if anybody could add that to the article. I myself (at the time) was looking for sources that showed it (so I could add it to the article since I don't know the whole routing) and could not find any. I was hoping that somebody who visited to the page (and subsequently the talk page) would be able to add that. Killiondude (talk) 00:39, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Reverted; my apologies. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

No need to apologize, no harm done. Thanks for being understanding. I appreciate that. Killiondude (talk) 00:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

CASH articles without junction lists

Do you know any California road articles that do not yet have junction lists? --Mgillfr (talk) 01:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I know there are quite a few - try above 100. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Sierra Highway

Rschen, I _FINALLY_ finished the re-write of Sierra Highway, a stepping stone to get both U.S. Route 395 and California State Route 14 up to GA. Would you mind giving this a quick overview to see if I missed anything. As this took about 50 times longer than I expected, i'd like to get a DYK out of it =-). Also, I think I might nominate this for GA also, I would argue this should not have a major intersections table, as this is more talking about a historical highway whose modern definition isn't 100% clear. do you concur? (if it does need a major intersectins table, I'll drop work and not nominate it for GA, i've improved it enough to meet my needs). Dave (talk) 08:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009

Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 45	24 November 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: 200th issue
ArbCom elections: Candidate profiles	News and notes: Fundraiser, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Dispatches: Featured article writers — the inside view
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 46	1 December 2008	About the Signpost

ArbCom elections: Elections open	Wikipedia in the news
WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 5, Issue 1	3 January 2009	About the Signpost

From the editor: Getting back on track
ArbCom elections: 10 arbitrators appointed	Virgin Killer page blocked, unblocked in UK
Editing statistics show decline in participation	Wikipedia drug coverage compared to Medscape, found wanting
News and notes: Fundraising success and other developments	Dispatches: Featured list writers
Wikipedia in the news	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Ice Hockey
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

AN/I notice

Hello, Rschen7754. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --KP Botany (talk) 23:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC) Hello - Im new to Wikipedia and wanted to know how my deleted article (blatent advertising) is any different that any of the similar articles found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Racing_schools I look forward to a reply - JKF0021 re: FAASST Performance Driving School Article —Preceding unsigned comment added by FPDS21 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Please read WP:SPAM. --Rschen7754 (T

OK if that is the case, then please delete the other WP:SPAM here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Racing_schools You did not answer my question which was "how is our article any different than these"?? If you delete one, you must delete all of them. Correct? FPDS21 (talk) 02:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)jkf0021

Feel free to AFD them. --Rschen7754 (T C) 03:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: WikiCup question

This is close to what we used. Garden. 20:55, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the USRD-CRWP Cup

Hello, Rschen7754, and welcome to the USRD-CRWP Cup. This is just a reminder that the contest will start at 00:00 UTC on Saturday (about 4 PM Pacific and about 7 PM Eastern on Friday). Nominations must be made after that time to count for the contest.

Currently, there is only one pool for contestants. Please feel free to invite any Wikipedia user to join. We need a few more users to get another pool.

It is unknown when the first round will end; however, it will last at least 3 weeks.

Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 01:15, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

USRD cup

Sure,  Done –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:43, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

The Cup

You should have asked me during my more active days! :) Sorry though, I just don't have the time to involve myself back to Wikipedia, at least for the time being. It definitely is a good idea, and you've got a good amount of editors already signed up. Good luck with the Cup! Hope it brings more activity to our project. CL — 03:36, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem... there's many times when real life just gets too busy. --Rschen7754 (T C) 03:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

USRD-CRWP Cup

Thanks for the note. Will see what I can pop off about roads and highways. Probably no pictures though its like minus 20 here, unless we get a chinook. Kind regards SriMesh | talk 04:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art

First off, I apologize for the spam. You are receiving this message because you have indicated that you are in Southern California or interested in Southern California topics (either via category or WikiProject).

I would like to invite you to the Los Angeles edition of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art, a photography scavenger hunt to be held at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) on Saturday, February 28, 2009, from 1:00 to 7:00 PM. All photos are intended for use in Wikipedia articles or on Wikimedia Commons. There will be a prize available for the person who gets the most photos on the list.

If you don't like art, why not come just to meet your fellow Wikipedians. Apparently, we haven't had a meetup in this area since June 2006!

If you are interested in attending, please add your name to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art#Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Please make a note if you are traveling to the area (train or plane) and need transportation, which can probably be arranged via carpool, but we need time to coordinate. Lodging is as of right now out of scope, but we could discuss that if enough people are interested.

Thank you and I hope to see you there! howcheng {chat} 00:23, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Saskatchewan Highways commons media

1. File:25StETrafficLights.jpg just because there were only two images in the Canadian Traffic signal category.
2. File:UBridge.jpg ‎ on route of Highway 5
3. File:25StEUniversityBridge.jpg ‎ on route of Highway 5
4. File:SkHwy5TurnsNorth.jpg ‎ on route of Highway 5
5. File:PedestrianWalkDontWalk.jpg ‎ just a clear shot of pedestrian signage
6. File:SkHwy5Ends.jpg ‎actual road sign for Saskatchewan Highway 5 article and used thus
7. File:Fairbanks-MorseWarehouse.jpg on route of Saskatchewan Highway 5 as a heritage site
8. File:SkHwy5Begins.jpg actual road sign for Saskatchewan Highway 5 article and used thus

That is all. I have to still smoosh the Saskatchewan Highway 5 article to see which old and which new photos along the route will go into the actual text. Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 00:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks; I'll work that into the next score update. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:58, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 2	10 January 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes:Flagged Revisions and permissions proposals, hoax, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Dispatches: December themed Main Page	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 20:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: The Cup!

Maybe, but probably not. The edits I might make will require significant map-based research for maps from 1917. At least they exist now! —Rob (talk) 21:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm in the same boat... lame California :P Though I cannot win the competition as judge... --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Another question about the Cup. You're watching Commons to see when we upload shields, correct? I haven't uploaded any yet, but I have a bunch that I will be uploading. --Fredddie™ 22:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Shoot. I probably should be. I'll start doing that in the next update. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey dude, One more: assisted edits count (awb, huggle) and anti-vandal activity count, right? It's definitely not cheating. Right?Synchronism (talk) 10:28, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but they are minor edits (worth only 0.01 per edit). --Rschen7754 (T C) 18:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

In the scoring explanation, could you add the abbreviations from the standings next to what they stand for? I find myself having to scroll up to see what all of them mean. --Fredddie™ 02:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to remember to do that next time I update. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, just wondering - how often will you be updating the Cup statistics on the charts? Jamie^☆S93 21:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to update once around 4 PM Pacific every day. That being said, I probably will miss quite a few days during the contest. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Highway coordinates

Thanks for bringing my attention to the highway edits. I'll roll back those edits, if you like, which I believe to be all those containing the words "route", "highway" or "interstate", other than Route Twisk: this will also roll back all such edits to similarly-named road articles in Canada. You'll need to unblock the bot for me to do that. If you know any other name patterns for articles that should be rolled back, please let me know. -- The Anome (talk) 21:23, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I think that I got them all. I may have missed one or two here or there. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:20, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to have put you to all that trouble. I'm very happy to fix the bot's errors, including fixing them programattically in bulk. If you see any similar problems in future, please don't hesitate to ask, and I'll fix them myself. -- The Anome (talk) 21:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Update: I think the edits to the Chinese "X Road" articles might be OK, since they generally refer to very short roads. Would you mind if I filtered these by latitude/longitude, and put them back? -- The Anome (talk) 21:29, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion on geotagging roads - I think the options were south or west terminus or midpoint. The problem with the road edits was that the center of the Google Map citation was being tagged - which probably was not the south or west terminus or midpoint. I would wait until the resolution of that discussion first before tagging any roads. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:USRD cup inquiry

I am uploading images I have taken of roads months ago, way before this competition began. I usually like to take a LOT of pictures of the roads I travel on. As for the competition, you could probably give points for the images I have placed onto Wikipedia articles as well as a select few that could possibly be used in other articles. Dough4872 (talk) 17:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, but which ones are these? It's already taking me about 40 minutes a day to score these and I can't go through all those images and try to figure it out. Could you give me a list? --Rschen7754 (T C) 18:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Here is a list of images you can score:

• File:DE 92 WB past DE 261.JPG used in Delaware Route 92 article
• File:US 202 SB at Cleveland Avenue Wilmington.JPG used in U.S. Route 202 in Delaware article
• File:DE 141 SB at William Penn High School.JPG used in Delaware Route 141 article
• File:DE 141 SB approaching S. James Street-Old Airport Road.JPG used in Delaware Route 141 article
• File:DE 141 SB approaching Alapocas Drive.JPG used in Delaware Route 141 article
• File:DE 9 NB-DE 273 EB at 6th Street.JPG shows end sign at eastern terminus of Delaware Route 273
• File:DE 9 NB at I-295 NB-US 40 EB exit.JPG shows an important interchange on Delaware Route 9
• File:DE 9 NB approaching Moore Avenue.JPG shows a picture of Delaware Route 9 with reasurance shield
• File:DE 141 SB between DE 34 and DE 2.JPG shows construction on Delaware Route 141 (could be used in history section)
• File:DE 141 SB DE 2 EB-Centerville Road ramp 2.JPG shows a ramp to Delaware Route 2 (one of only two images in that article's Commons category)
• File:DE 100-DE 141 SB at Old Barley Mill Road.JPG shows an image of Delaware Route 100 and Delaware Route 141 (could be used in Delaware Route 100 article)
• File:Delaware Route 141 SB at DE 9-DE 273.JPG shows end sign at southern terminus of Delaware Route 141
• File:US 202-DE 141 SB at US 13 NB-US 40 EB exit.JPG shows southern terminus of U.S. Route 202 Dough4872 (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: USRDCRWPCup

Please let me know:

1) if it is too late to jump in to the competition, and

2) if maps such as found at Massachusetts Route 88 are definitely MTF compliant. I am confident this and the dozens of others I have done in this Commons category are OK, I would simply like confirmation before continuing to contribute using this style.

Thanks -- Sswonk (talk) 13:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and add you. I would take the MTF questions to WT:USRD/MTF as I don't really follow map standards. --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

CA 46 GA review

Hey, I've finished reviewing California State Route 46. Let me know on the review page if you've made changes to the article or if you need clarification. Thanks. --Polaron | Talk 23:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

CA 78 FAC

Per our discussion in IRC, you have my permission to renominate it on the FAC, even though renominating so soon is something we normally discourage. Raul654 (talk) 21:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 3	17 January 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes: New board members, changes at ArbCom	Wikipedia in the news
Dispatches: Featured article writers—the 2008 leaders	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Pharmacology
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 00:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Commas

As a professional proofreader/copyeditor, I know that I am right on putting commas after city/state names. WillC (talk) 01:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Not after every single occurrence of one. If you have any questions take it to WT:MOS. --Rschen7754 (T C) 03:07, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I hope you have alot of time on your hands because I already put commas where they belong on every county entry in the country and many other geographical lists...and might I say, there were many more my way than the way you are suggesting. WillC (talk) 23:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I only took care of the road articles - other people can deal with that, or perhaps you might like to revert that yourself. By the way, when I brought this up on IRC, your use of commas was criticized. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:53, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

So are you saying the rules of punctuation are different on wikipedia than they are in real life? i am trying to understand why you took the time to make all of those reverts when formal media dictates my commas be there. so far the only source you cite to say they do not belong there is wikipedia. WillC (talk) 00:09, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Commas never go there, not even in real life. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I have 30 years in journalism as evidence that says wikipedia is wrong about this. Whatever. WillC (talk) 01:12, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Drive by vandal

It looks like User:CapOneCHGO vandalized my userpage again, right after your warning. Another editor fixed it promptly; I only noticed either event because my userpage is in my watchlist, so no real harm. LotLE×talk 22:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Blocked - especially due to possible BLP issues. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 4	24 January 2009	About the Signpost

Jimbo requests that developers turn on Flagged Revisions	Report on accessing Wikipedia via mobile devices
News and notes: New chapters, new jobs, new knight and more	Wikipedia in the news: Britannica, Kennedy, Byrd not dead yet
Dispatches: Reviewing featured picture candidates	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Delivered at 04:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)

It's called stressing a point

Nothing personal to the writers of the article. It doesn't belong, but people are blinded by poor sources and some clever writing. --GroundhogTheater (talk) 18:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

You didn't have to use ALL CAPS and ridicule his article to state that. --Rschen7754 (T C) 20:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Relax, people are way to sensitive on Wikipedia. --GroundhogTheater (talk) 21:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, it wasn't my article that you sent to AFD, and that even seemed a bit rude to me. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Did he curse or call anyone out by name? He didn't belittle any writers. He was making his point for wanting the article deleted. People will disagree. --BurpTheBaby (Talk) 22:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

For some reason this account makes no edits from 7 November until 26 January, just to oppose a FAC and then comment on my talk page. I find this very interesting; one has to admit it looks suspicious. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikiquette violation? You've crossed the line. No one says you can't have a stance on NY 382, but I would expect the same respect in return. It is very immature to start tattling on people who disagree. Last I checked, Wikipedia is a collective effort. Not just for those who have 40,000+ edits. --GroundhogTheater (talk) 01:06, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

(indent reset) You may disagree (and several people have in the past). However, doing it in a rude manner is over the line. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:07, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Again, you don't like CAPS. I've noted it. It a way I stress a point. --GroundhogTheater (talk) 01:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

As you have done in your "Week of" at the top of the page to stress important things happening for you. =) --GroundhogTheater (talk) 01:29, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not AFD'ing somebody's article in my schedule. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Then whats the point of an AfD? No one is going to AFD their own article. And an AfD is to generate discussion. Consensus spoke, so I don't know why you're still picking on me. --GroundhogTheater (talk) 01:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

When you AFD something you try to be respectful, especially if it is a FAC. It sounds like you're trying to encourage a mob mentality with that AFD. --Rschen7754 (T C) 01:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

You sound paranoid toward Groundhog. He had an opinion, stated it, generated a discussion and now its up to others to decide. His AFD was decided upon quickly, but with that said people are allowed to have differing opinions without people questioning their motives. Your userpage says you hate immature people, but I think it may be time for you to look into the mirror. Because it's very immature for you to take someone with a differing opinion to a Wikiquette forum and drag on your "assumptions". --BurpTheBaby (Talk) 01:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like an ad hominem to me. Both of you (or you?) are missing the point - you have the right to express your viewpoint. But AFDing it in a vehement manner was out of line. Let me put it this way - say you wrote a FA and I thought it wasn't up to standards. I have the right to send it to FAR. I don't have the right to go "THIS ARTICLE SUCKS!!!!! Does it meet FA quality? NO!" on the FAR. Provided, I've exaggerated slightly, but I hope you get the point. --Rschen7754 (T C) 02:06, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

OMG, please, grow up! I did not write that. You are totally out of line. You are an admin right? Way to create a lot of unnecessary drama. I have a good mind to report you if this continues! --GroundhogTheater (talk) 05:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it's best this thread is archived ASAP. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 05:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Um, I said I was exaggerating... --Rschen7754 (T C) 08:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you're expecting me to be perfectly clear with how I post, you should hold yourself to that standard too. The last post seemed very rude to me. --GroundhogTheater (talk) 17:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment.

Thank you for alerting me of USSH. I'm a reasonable and thoughtful person. That's why I didn't make any moves not counting one that I made and reverted back less than a minute later. The WP:USSH guideline might be reconsidered. I am trying to locate where the NYDOT calls it "New York STATE Route (number)". I haven't found any sources yet. Thanks again for letting me know of a page (USSH) that I hadn't read before. Chergles (talk) 20:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:USSH has been modified in the past, so it is possible to modify. However, I would broadly advertise any discussion to change it as this is a touchy matter for some. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Response

I fix things on WP:CASH because that's what I do. There is perfectly nothing wrong with putting mileage that goes out to three decimal places, in fact all what I did was follow NE2 (talk · contribs)'s style (changing mileage to trucklist, use his junction list styles, and more importantly, writing an article). I came back here so I could learn how to cooperate better at USRD while at the same time incorporating my ideas to CASH. If you have problems with me and believe I'm acting childish just because I follow NE2's style, you also need to grow up because all I'm trying to do is be firm with my ideas yet at the same time cooperative (hence why you had problems with NE2 when he was still here at USRD and also why Wikipedia reviews write stuff about "roads attacking" and stuff). There's a thing called being bold, maybe you should try to refresh your memory with that sometime.

Furthermore, I believed that Freewayguy (talk · contribs) and the 75 IP were able to contribute well to USRD. Yes, you all had problems with them and you all had problems with me. Yes, they also annoyed me too. However, I don't see any good reason why you went and blocked both of them. Has it ever occurred to you that all the other WikiProjects are pretty much doing just fine, and that USRD is sounding very bureaucratic? All you're doing is driving editors away by a) blocking them, b) threatening to block them, c) reverting their edits, and d) even just by sending those {{subst:welcomeroad}} messages that no one gives a flying fladoodle about (almost as if it were SPAM). Judging from your contributions, I see that you are doing more harm to new USRD editors than good.

And another subject of matter I'd like to bring up. I don't know why you enjoy reverting other people's edits. Heck, from your contributions, about 10% of them are reverting stuff. (Maybe that's how you got your 40,000 edit count?) Freewayguy, 75 IP, and I were doing just fine until you came along and started reverting our edits left and right. Then they and I tried reasoning why this idea should be implemented. (Maybe it's not clear in words, but they and I were definitely sending our messages.) Because of your little rollback tool, that's how all the CASH articles became a mess (not that I care of). You constantly say that someone needs to go clean the articles, yet you can't do it yourself? They aren't going to go clean that up for you; they only edit articles as they please; they edit what they want at their own time.

Of course, I know I am not mature when editing USRD articles (and not because you said that in yoru essay). I know that fact because I'm learning. Of course, you're right; I shouldn't switch accounts all the time, and I'm not planning on doing that for a while. That's when I was even more immature. Sadly, I don't think you can see that I have changed since the first time I came here about a over a year ago. You need to see that there are editors like me are sometimes willing to learn, but obviously it takes time. I think you already know that, considering that you demonstrated you understood the standards well enough to be the "evil dictator of USRD".

In a nutshell, this message is intended to get Rschen7754 to wake up and see that I'm trying to learn, that he should not just expect editors to immediately edit the way he wants it right away. If anybody else is reading this, go ahead ... work this thread, because I know this message has a lot to say and a lot to be replied about. -- M*gill*FR (blab to me) 04:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I hope that you realize that I am a college student and that I do not have all of the time in the world. I would definitely go and clean the CASH articles - if I had the time. Right now, I can barely take care of the GAN hold on CA 46 (it's been there for over two weeks, when the traditional deadline is 7 days), scoring the USRDCRWP Cup, and try and stay on top of my homework. So I am virtually forced to rollback or undo in the interests of time if the old version of the article is any better than your version, even if it is not necessarily the best version.

In regards to the other editors you mention - Freewayguy was given several chances. However, he made a mess of the articles (and by this, I mean edits like [6], which is wrong on several levels). He also began to be incivil [7]. He was then blocked indefinitely. Following this, he made some very incivil remarks and death threats (see [8] - but I warn you, these are R-rated). I-210 on the other hand, was not blocked indefinitely. On the English Wikipedia, his block expires on February 10, and he has shown every indication that he wants to return then, as you can see by his comments on his talk page. However, I-210 engaged in sockpuppetry or open proxies or some other stuff - I'm not exactly sure what he did, but apparently the m:Stewards blocked him from every Wikimedia site for a while (Spanish Wikipedia, Commons, etc.). So I-210 is not gone for good; I'm not saying that he will be allowed to stay, however. We'll just have to see what happens in ten days.

I think that you have a misconception about my role in CASH and USRD. There are several users (such as Polaron, Scott5114 to name a few) who do revert several edits across USRD. However, they tend to stick to their specific regions of the country, as they know whether an edit is correct or incorrect. Though I do not solely revert edits in the western U.S., I tend to revert those edits more often than I would edits to the eastern U.S. since I have lived out west all of my life and have traveled extensively around the West Coast (California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Arizona, Montana, Wyoming...) However, I have persistently reverted the edits of several users over the last few months (I can think of the 71 IP in SC, the 4.255 IP in San Francisco, etc.) and even given a few short blocks. This is the typical practice at USRD - give the user quite a few warnings, and then start giving blocks of increasing length. I see the rest of Wikipedia starting to go to this practice as well - much more so than back in 2005. So it's not that I'm only reverting your edits, or only those of the CASH editors - it's across the board, with many USRD users involved.

That being said, I tend to have a very strong personality (though you might not be able to tell from real life). There have been several actions that have been taken over the past few years where it looks like I have been going on my own. Typically, I ask the other USRD users on the IRC channel before doing something like that. However, I usually wind up carrying out the controversial action and look like the bad guy. Is this justified? I can't say that I am innocent in the matter, but (excuse the language) I'm not as bad as I'm crapped up to be.

On to your return. After you created the account, we had a lot of correspondence to decide what to do. By we, I mean that I emailed Chase... Cavalry, and I talked to several other users (I believe Scott, Dave for example). We basically decided that we were going to let you edit but keep a watch on your account. Under the circumstances (being that you have caused trouble in the past) it would have been foolish of us not to keep a watch on your account, since we didn't know what you would do.

Another reason we decided to let you edit was because we believed you had potential. Freewayguy couldn't even speak English, and there was little hope for him doing anything productive. I-210 ... not that much better. However, you have done some productive things for CASH. There are several editors at USRD who are still in high school or younger (not naming names, but you can probably figure it out). In fact, there are several other users who edited Wikipedia in high school (I started as a high school freshman). The "policy" that we have towards younger users editing Wikipedia is that as long as they are teachable, enthusiastic (usually not a problem) and are being a net gain to the project, we let them edit and train them up. After about six months to a year, there is a noticeable improvement in their editing. A few of these users have even gone on to become administrators.

However, your situation was a bit different because of your close relationship with AL2TB. Another user who had a similar situation was User:JohnnyAlbert10, who was forced into retirement lately by real life. His brother opened several accounts, made a mess of articles and would not respond to talk pages. Suddenly, he became a vandal and was indefinitely blocked. Then we get this other account popping up claiming that he is this vandal's brother. On Wikipedia, that just looks like an excuse - see Wikipedia:Guide to appealing a block for why. Therefore, many of us were very reluctant to trust JohnnyAlbert10 (JA10). However, we let him edit but kept an eye on what he did. JA10, even though he was not trusted very much at first, did good work. After a few months, it became obvious to us that JA10 was a productive user and a good editor and that he was telling the truth, as his story soon proved to be too difficult for him to have made up.

In your case (at least from my viewpoint) it didn't seem obvious that you understood what a WP:SOCK was when you were accused of it. Following this, you started making nonstandard edits, and did not respond to correction. After you began to use socks and switched accounts, we decided that the best course of action was to follow the WP:SOCK policy, which included blocking.

And you know the rest. The question is, where do you go from here?

My advice to you would be to gain trust from the editors at USRD. Right now, you're sort of on a probationary status because of your past history. You have shown some improvement in cooperation, and we appreciate that. However, our main concern is over your reluctance to be corrected. Everyone makes mistakes when editing; I have made several. In addition to this, we realize that those editors who have not yet completed high school probably will not write as well as those who have. However, it's how you respond to the edits and to the criticism that makes the difference. People who revert you are not automatically wrong just because they reverted you; you are not always right. You can 1) when being corrected, treat whoever reverted or whatever as if they know nothing, are wrong, and are idiots or just rollback-happy people (even though they are older, have more experience on Wikipedia, have more education, etc.) or 2) respectfully acknowledge your error, try not to make it again, and move on. I realize that sometimes people reverting are truly incorrect; if that is the case, then politely and respectfully let them know - just treat it as if they didn't mean anything malicious but just made a goof, and WP:AGF. Now, there are the times when you do encounter difficult users who really don't know anything and who are just jerks (usually they advocate the deletion of all road articles or oppose all road FACs), but you usually don't run into those until you become an administrator or go for WP:FAC. Typically it's left to the administrators or more experienced users to deal with these users, so you usually don't have to take on the stress of dealing with them (I frequently take care of stuff like this).

I guess that I wrote a lot. So in summary, yes, we have recognized a change for the better since you first came here, and that is why you are still able to edit. However, you need to be able to work with other editors (who may be older than you) respectfully and be willing to listen to correction. We do recognize that you have the potential for great work at USRD; however, you need to be able to work with others, as that is the whole point of a collaborative effort such as Wikipedia. --Rschen7754 (T C) 10:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)