User talk:Wehwalt/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Book

hello,

can you search the following book on JSTOR: Miles Davis: sein Leben, seine Musik, seine Schallplatten. It is in German, but it contains important content about his LPs, from the page 105 on (I was unable to find that information in English, maybe because there are more Davis fans in Germany than in other countries :)). It might be useful for Miles Davis discography. Regards.--GoP_T^C_N 21:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't see it there. It usually has articles, not books. I don't see any articles which discuss that book, unfortunately. You may need to talk to someone in Germany, or go to the expense of getting the book.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Need An Opinion

Was updating some of the broken references on the Stephens City article and one is giving me grief. It is appears the website is having an "internal service error", so I can't pull of the link for the reference, but it is still on the archives for the site (scroll down and look for "Shull sworn in as mayor of town"). Would the archive link (showing the page I have linked to currently) be enough for a reference or would I have to find an actual article. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:00, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Have you considered using |archiveurl= and |archivedate= in the cite web template while leaving the original url intact? I think it is generally used when something has been archived by an external site, but I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work. Ryan Vesey Review me! 23:03, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, this isn't an archive as in the Internet Archive, it's just the archive with links for all the articles that appeared in the paper for that month and year (in this case June, 2010) from the newspaper itself. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

If it's from a newspaper that has a decaying online edition, remember, you don't need the online source if it was once in the newspaper, though the page number would be nice to give the reader. You might also want to consult User:Br'er Rabbit, he's up on such things better than me and very helpful on the technical things. (it's Stephens City, Virginia, BR)--Wehwalt (talk) 23:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Okie Dokie, will ask him. I never thought about just linking via the newspaper information (without the URL). I forget I can do that sometimes. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I see your point, because there is still no way to know the content of the article. I don't think it would be harmful though, it proves that the source existed at least. The fact that a citation link no longer exists isn't a reason to remove it. You can assume good faith that the material cited was in the source. If you wish, you could email the webmaster of the Stephens City website asking for the minutes of May, June, and July 2010. Currently, the minutes are only posted for 2011-on. A link to the webmaster's email can be found here. Ryan Vesey Review me! 23:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Good idea Ryan, never thought about that. :) To the email! <whoosh> - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

If he emails you them in PDF or some such, then you could cite directly to them by page number. My concern with dead links is that they attract, if not flies, then attention from FAR.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:28, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

That's why I am updating them so I can keep the article out of FAR. Don't want to go there, FAC was bad enough. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:33, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Smart move, that. I drove through your burg a few weeks ago though did not stop; the Beltway was impassible so I couldn't get to 270, as I was driving to Illinois. I stopped in Winchester for gas and would have had breakfast had the Shoney's still been in business.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Shoney's is closed? Wow! Thought that place was still open. I don't go on that end of Winchester that often, except to get Long John Silvers once-in-a-very-great-while. There are some pretty nice places on Exit 313, along with your typical local restaurants. Of course, us here on 307 we have the typical fast food places (Mickey D's, BK, Arby's, Waffle House) along with the High Point Truck Stop in the center of town, but that is more like a diner to the local folks (not many truckers go there cause of the far away location). Hope ya make a return visit to Winchester/Stephens City soon. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:26, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

A lot of them have closed. I like them because you don't have to waste a lot of time waiting for your order, but can just help yourself.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, next time you come through the area, check out the "Butcher Block Buffet" in Stephens City (Exit 307). Always a good meal, have heard awesome things about it, but never went (no money to eat out) and right by the interstate. They have a sign pointed toward 81, so you can see where they are. They are opposite Sheetz when you get off either exit. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I know where that is, at least the Sheetz.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, if you go on the other side of the bridge, turn down "Town Run Lane" (which is right beside the KFC/Taco Bell) you will see it on your left (81 is on your right). It's between the KFC/Taco Bell and the two motels. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Need Another Opinion

Can you give the Demographics section a look-see, particularly the Ancestry section (last paragraph in that section). In 2000, the US Census Bureau the Ancestry stats in precentages, but in 2010, they just gave figures (numbers, no precentages). I did my best to change up how I was writing the stats, but it looks kinda bad. It is sourced through the US Census Bureau, but my writing just sucks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I believe it would be appropriate to continue to use percentages if you wished. Simply dividing the numbers who claimed a certain descent by the total population should not be considered WP:OR in my opinion (but I'd like to see Wehwalt's take on this). For example you could state that 20.4% claimed German descent, 11.2% claimed Irish descent... Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The precentages were according to the 2000 Census and the figures according to the 2010 Census. If someone could do the math (I suck at math) and put those figures into precentages, then I could go back to the previous sentence setup, but with the current (2010) information.

Also, I am considering removing the "Geographic location box" at the bottom of the page. I added it because I thought it was neat (back in 2010). Today (in 2012), I think it is just cluttering the "External Links" section. What do you think, should it stay or should it go, now?- Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:32, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

So I played around with some div tags and this is the example I came up with. I think it is nice and concise; however, it does use html rather than wikimarkup. I'm going to see if I can have the same result using wikimarkup. Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:23, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Here is my example using wikimarkup. I don't think it looks as good, but it is probably less confusing to read. Personally, I would go with the div tags one if you want to go with either. Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Note, both of my above two comments are referring to example changes I made to the external links section in order to keep the geographic location box while making it look uncluttered. I almost think that it looks less cluttered like this than it would with no geographic location box at all because white space is removed. Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll put the percentages into a table for you. I don't think the geographic location box is too much clutter, but I think it would look somewhat better if some type of div tag or something could allow it to exist to the left of the listen to this article box and the commons box. Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:08, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the precentage chart, I will add that posthaste. I am not sure if there is a div tag for the geolocation box, but I will check. I am going to cut the table below, so it doesn't take up space on Wehwalt's talk page and paste it over on the Stephens City, Virginia page as is. Again, thanks! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Did you notice in the 2 comments I made directly above this that I found some solutions using both div tags and wikimarkup? Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

No, I missed that. Seen the stat box and focused on that. My goof. On the stat box, would it be possible to have the stat box on a subpage of the Stephens City article (like Stephens City, Virginia/AncestryStatBox or something) and transclude it to the Demographics section, so the box code didn't take up a large amount of space? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Checked the two div tag versions out and I like this one, but it is possible to have the geolocation box as it is, but not bringing the external links (town site and the Newtown History Center link) down as it has done? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I checked Wikipedia:Subpages#Articles do not have sub-pages (main namespace) and I don't think it is possible to create it there. It appears like you should create it at Template:Stephens City Ancestry Box or whatever you would like to name it within the template namespace. Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:53, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

As for the geolocation box, that was my problem with attempting to use wikimarkup. So far, I haven't been able to figure out how to now move those down. What is it that you prefer about that version, the wikimarkup or the size of the geolocation box? If it is the size of the geolocation box, I think can modify the version that uses div tags to make it similar. Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:56, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

On the template, I created it and it can be found at {{Stephens City Ancestry Box}}, but I am unsure if it will work and not mash up the sections.

On the geolocation box, I perfer the size of the geolocation box as it doesn't take up as much space as it previously did. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

If you don't mind, I will reinstate my first example with a column width of 700px instead of 800 px. That should leave the geolocation box looking roughly like it did in the second edit while removing some of the other issues like the extra spacing. Ryan Vesey Review me! 07:20, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't mind at all. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Avery Brundage

I'd be willing to PR it for you or take it up for review if it is listed at GAC, next month. I am really hectic with the Roy Lichtenstein exhibit that opens at the Art Institute of Chicago tomorrow. I have about 10 books checked out from the Chicago Public Library. Prior to May 9 WP only had one of his paintings. Now see Category:Paintings by Roy Lichtenstein has 28 paintings. List it at PR next month or GAC sooner and ping me in about 3 weeks or when you see I am no longer working on those articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I will probably have it at FAC by then. Of course, feel free to review it then. Good luck with the Liechtenstein. Well done with that. I have a half dozen checked out on the Olympics or Bryan myself.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox coin and Au/Ag

I cut the parens. The idea here was to mimic the Mass parameters (four of them). See this test. I filled in the other silver fields with stuff. The "0.36169^[1] troy oz" would have appeared in parens. I think the idea with Mass was to use all of the fields. If you don't expect to use all of them, we could leave it as-is, but I'm thinking that it might be better to cut the fields you're not going to use (and I'm not sure which those would be). Jack Merridew 17:27, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I would cut them. Is silver sold by the ounce worldwide? When I was in Dubai they sold gold by the troy ounce, though everything else was metric (I bought a little tenth-ounce coin which today would be more expensive). Don't remember what they did with silver though. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:37, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

which "them"? Au and Ag each have four fields:

| Gold                  = 
| Gold_troy_oz          = 
| Gold_grain            = 
| Gold_ounce            = 

and Silver...

I've no idea what the norms are in numismatics (or bullion trading). Or failed dispute resolution systems, for that matter. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 18:53, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I think only the ones which result in troy ounces are needed. Grains is very obsolete, but as weights of coins were often expressed in grains at one time, you might see that in a coin article, but few modern readers "think" in it. This is for the people who are consulting us for the quick and dirty on the coin they found in Granny's attic before they convert it into folding cash. On the other, touche.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:58, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll just cut the others; if they're being used, they should be kicked into line, or some could be restored. I'm thinking only you're doing much of this. On the other, there's always, MfD ;) or more reasonably tagging with {{historical}} (or {{humour}})... Br'er Rabbit (talk) 19:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Is there a way to run a search to see if they are being used?--Wehwalt (talk) 19:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Not quite, but tracking categories could be added... I've not actually done that, but expect it's straightforward. enough. Have you added this to many? Expect anyone else to have? Br'er Rabbit (talk) 19:45, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Probably only me, since I'm only the only active coin writer as far as I know. It should be eleven, every article about a dime or above, plus the Jefferson nickel because of its wartime version.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I look'em over; you're busy. I've got the template talk page watched, so I'll notice complaints. Moby Dick 20:45, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Having taken on Tim's comments, I could probably nom at FAC, but I'd like to see what Brian has to say and also maybe get some feedback from others. The article has had a fair amount of non-you or me traffic today.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm seeing that; I believe I saw Brian say he'd be looking soon. Speaking of looking. I'll keep an eye on it; the PR page, too. Gonna be re-looking at Antarctic pages, too. Portuguese Man o' War 21:10, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that would be a good thing. The other one's really out there.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:21, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Draped Bust dollar

• Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 26, 2012

  Saturday's... need any polishing? Br'er Rabbit (talk) 22:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

It's one of RHM22's, but anything you could do in a good cause would be nice.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I've already done my work on it ;) Anything you see that's needful? Br'er Rabbit (talk) 23:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks good technically. I have a couple of references I didn't have when RHM22 was doing his work, I'll check them when I get home and check a small stock of old coin magazines I have.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:31, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I uploaded a rotated version of the reverse image; it was 11° off. Have a good night. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 23:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, little under an hour until I got to go.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

A Child of Our Time...and Cosima

Just to let you know, I've closed the Child PR and nominated it at FAC. I saw your comment on Tim's talkpage about possible Cosima sources. I am quite well provided here (lists of material accumulated so far are in my sandboxes nos 7 and 8), but if you have ideas about stuff that ought to be added I'd be very grateful. I have made a start with Brundage. Brianboulton (talk) 23:04, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for that, I have dealt with those and await the next tranche. I'll be over to Child soon and will glance over the source lists and not bother you with anything trivial on that.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Nicolo Giraud

would you please watchlist this .. asking cause I know you're familiar with FA stuff. — Ched :  ?  11:25, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:34, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Adoptee or mentee

Hello! I selected a couple adopter names that resonated well with me to see if someone could mentor a new editor already going through RFC/U. There is disagreement whether the editor's admitted bad habit of not handling disputes well is reformable or irreformable. It appeared the next step was for an outside entrant (me) on the "pro" !side to see if a neutral mentor can be found agreeable to all parties. It would be understood that if two other editors objected to the mentee's edits as, say, personal attacks, the mentee and the objectors (e.g., those from the "irreformable" !side) would give you the power to make a judgment to strike or not to strike. The editor in question is User:Agent00f and the topic area is mixed martial arts, though he has expressed willingness to demonstrate constructive edits to other topic areas. You can see some of the hot pages in my edit history, but I'll watch for replies here for a bit. Thank you for your consideration. JJB 19:34, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

To save me some bother, do you have a link to the discussion (s) in question?--Wehwalt (talk) 19:38, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. Try RFC/U or RFC. JJB 21:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll look at it but it likely won't be today, I'm busy with an article and can't concentrate on anything else.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I read the RFC/U and scrolled through the RFC. I'm willing to be considered. I will have to mention that I know nothing about MMA. I'd want to have a discussion with interested parties before I agreed, with backing out and no hard feelings if we didn't all feel right about going forward.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I made this edit. I know nothing about MMA, but my dad knows a lot, so I may be able to assist a bit in that area. Ryan Vesey Review me! 13:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

That would be fine. Better someone who is closer to speaking the lingo than me, I think. --Wehwalt (talk) 13:39, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello guys, this was linked from the RfC in question by JJB. You can see my reply to John's question there, and can also check my recent contribs for more context. The core issues can probably hashed out in less than a day with any sort of efficiency and I don't think it would take more than a week for broader discussion. I also don't think any MMA knowledge is necessary, since JJB came into this with none and after some moderate discussion now understands the situation as it relates to wiki policy and whatnot perhaps better than I do. You can look at all of his questions on the RfC Q&A and subsequent discussion on the talk page. If the magnitude of the MMA affair is not something you're comfortable with, please feel free to nominate others who might be better candidates. Thanks. Agent00f (talk) 19:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll look at the state of play Wed. nite or Thurs morning and weigh in as appropriate.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:44, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

This is Wehwalt's page, but posting here was mostly because the conversation already exists, and isn't meant to exclude Ryan from the discussion. In general I would feel more comfortable if an admin were on-board in some capacity as a peer to other ones in the dispute, but this doesn't mean that input from anyone up to the inherent challenges of this subject won't be valuable. The dispute is very quite now and everything is concentrated on real work which doesn't require much supervision, but I'm mostly worried about more disruptions from personal indictments flaring up in the future. Thanks. Agent00f (talk) 22:25, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Ryan and Wehwalt, just a reminder for followup on mentorship, as an admin in the MMA case now believes mediation "didn't work out". I think a simple repetition of the understandings (as already outline) by either Ryan or Wehwalt, and acceptance by Agent, would do the trick; then the certifiers can accept or reject. Thanks for your consideration. JJB 17:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I am not ignoring this, but have been fighting the flu for two days and I think it's won. You might do better seeking someone else.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Autochecked user, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anarchopedia

Hello Wehwalt, i hope you are doing good :). I was thinking if you could kindly grant me the Wikipedia:Autochecked users user right which is a part of the Pending changes feature. I am already a trusted user with several user rights which help me in my Wiki-work and also having this would help me to test it at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing which i do many times. I always use these user rights carefully and responsibly and having this flag will help too. Also can you help me in building this article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anarchopedia which i had started some days ago but haven't submitted it for review yet, because i am not sure it is completed much as it needs more content, references and sources. But i am sure you will be of very good help as you are great article writer :). Regards. TheGeneralUser (talk) 14:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll look it over tonight. I just got home and there's a storm both outside, and apparently on Wikipedia.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to hold off until the RFC on pending changes is formally closed. If it is meaningless, you are welcome to it. If it has a role, I will look at it in the light of whatever. I gather it is awaiting an uninvolved admin to close it.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Pres. Nixon and increased spending on sickle cell research, treatment, and education.

Hi Wehwalt, on the Richard Nixon article, I view you as kind of our coach and elder statesman. Now, per wikipedia, we kind of have to pretend that isn't the case and we're all equal! All the same, please rest assured that I very much appreciate your contributions and your sensible, matter-of-fact coaching.

I have been busy with a lot of other stuff and I feel my research on the sickle cell angle has stalled out and is at risk of dying on the vine (and I have researched this on the Internet at least five times!). I'm going to try and roll ahead with what I have in as straightforward a fashion as possible. I think it will be at least good or above, but it's not etched in concrete and we can change it as need be.

On an unrelated note, I think when Nixon was in the House and the Senate, his colleagues most probably referred to him as Dick Nixon. And his wife almost certainly used this shortened form of Richard. Now, how formal he was as vice president and later as president would be another interesting aspect. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 18:39, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

That is probably wise if you start out and I'll clean up the sawdust. I'm sorry, anything that isn't on the top of the stack gets neglected. I would have no problem with it being added to the infobox as a nickname, but don't really want it in the text. He definitely campaigned as "Dick", very often. Look at the image from the '52 campaign. But you are right, around here unless someone pushes for something it tends to die on the vine. Try to keep it to one paragraph please.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I kept it to two sentences, one medium-length and one longish. And it occurs to me that RN was a rather young man when he was elected to the vice-presidency in Nov. 1952. He was 39 years old. He had served in the navy during WWII, was elected to the U.S. House in 1946 and then to the U.S. Senate in 1950. And even when Nixon was elected to the presidency in 1968, he was still a relatively young man at age fifty-five. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 19:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, people don't realize that Nixon came out of nowhere in 1946 to VP in 1953. He was a young man in a hurry, and I suspect would have beaten anyone else in 1960 than an equally talented young man in a hurry. There are several images of him as a young man in this and associated articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

But when Richard was running in 1960, Eisenhower did not exactly give him a vote of confidence. (This, even though it would be a historical question, when President Eisenhower was recovering from one(?) heart attack, how many responsibilities did Vice-President Nixon assume?) FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 19:39, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

There wasn't yet a 25th Amendment, so Nixon was careful to not be seen as taking over as there was no legal authority. In an emergency, I'm sure he would have done what was necessary. I'm waiting for the second volume of Professor Gellman's series on Nixon's pre-presidential career, The Apprenticeship, which is to cover the vice presidential years. Hopefully this year. I think he will shed some light on the Eisenhower-Nixon relationship.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:31, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

And I think that's good leadership, kind of low-keying it and being available if needed. And I guess Alexander Haig is one of the classic examples of someone doing it clumsily. And I tend to think the media and we as actualy citizens treated Haig unfairly about this, as if we were high school students laughing at word usage chosen, rather than seeing the larger context in a serious way.

Okay, with Pres. Eisenhower, (don't remember exact quote), thinking of the exchange in which he was asked if he could name three things Nixon had contributed to the administration and he said, give me a week and I might be able to think of two. Ouch! In retrospect, this quote has rather been used as a peg point. I do not know how big a deal it was at the time. If Eisenhower had lost faith in Nixon, he should have made a change in 1956, as FDR did with a couple of his vice-presidents (maybe for different reasons). And Eisenhower could have done it in a face-saving way, perhaps saying something like, You're too talented a young man, I'm not going to let you waste another four years as vice-president, I'm just not. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 17:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I think that story might have gained in the telling. Eisenhower did apparently consider dropping Nixon from the ticket in 1956, making him Secretary of Commerce or similar to give him executive experience in an Eisenhower second term. Nixon pushed back about this for obvious reasons and he was retained on the ticket. I'm interested in seeing Prof. Gellman's view on this, Nixon as VP has gotten relatively little study.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:55, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Liberty Bell Pavilion

Your post inspired me to begin work on a page on the pavilion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BoringHistoryGuy/sandbox I found mediocre but PD B&W images at HABS, and will upload them to Wiki Commons. One good PD color photo would be nice. Eventually, the Liberty Bell Center should probably have its own article. BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 20:29, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Well that is good. That is where I first saw the Bell, as a college student. I really didn't know much about the history of it then.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

New Question. Submission Constitutional question of constitutionalism vs. imperialism

You opened this as a Talk and others say I need a project page not talk. You put it in Talk. Can you put it next into Wikipedia:Articles for Creation/Constitutional question of constitutionalism vs. imperialism? Thanks.--Evarose3 (talk) 21:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

I was approached by on IRC to do it. I believe it's correct as it is. If you are confused, you might want to ask at WT:AFC.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Pierre Monteux

Cg2p0B0u8m and I have put the old boy up for peer review, if you have time and inclination to look in we shall be grateful. There is not the least urgency about it. We hope to get Pierre up to FAC at some time in the future, but we have set no deadlines for ourselves. Tim riley (talk) 12:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I will look in on him.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Olympic games

I'm sure you are metres/meters ahead of me, but are you plotting to get Avery B on the front page while the 2012 Olympics are bringing London to its knees enrapturing the world in the next two months? Tim riley (talk) 21:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Not particularly. But I would not want it to run on any day but an opening or closing day of an Olympics, or the upcoming anniversary of Munich. I believe Olympic games is FA.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see you two know each other; another pity. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 09:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Fellowes

• Please review: I did both move to WP:LDR and one WP:SFN .. link. comments, tips, or laughter welcome. Chedzilla (talk) 07:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks...

	Thanks...
	...for all your copyedits on The Concert in Central Park! :) GoPTCN 13:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not done yet! Just doing it a bit gradually. Always happy to help you, GOP.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Jesse Washington

Hi Wehwalt, Jesse Washington is at FAC now if you'd like to review. You helped with the peer review a few weeks back, feels like a long time though, I'll be glad to finish this project. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll bet! The pictures from that are haunting me. I'll be over there today.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:12, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Brundage quote

Hi Wehwalt. According to the Carly Adams source, the quote came from the front page of the New York Times 25 Dec 1931. Sadly, I was unable to find a way to access it (for free) from the paper's archives. The current quote sounds like a typo to me, but it's hard to tell without looking at the original source as the Butterfield quote differs. If you can find a way to look at it you may get a definitive answer – there is an accuracy issue here because I've read three versions: one with an extraneous "what", one with a "that", and the version I sourced with neither. Yes. This is nit-picking at its greatest! SFB 10:30, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I've got NYTimes access. Let me catch up from what happened overnight and wake up a bit, and let's sew what he says. I'll research it later this morning. I'll make a screenshot so anyone who wants it can have it, if it is there.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

The word "what" is omitted in the Times article, which then goes on to discuss the ambiguity, or lack thereof in AAU rules and Brundage's own experiences 20 years before, just like Butterfield does in the source. In other words, Butterfield plainly made a goof all of which I will set out in a hidden note when I feel a bit more awake. In the interim, I've removed the word. Thank you for being persistent.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

It's 1932, by the way, and the quote can be found here for free.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Great work! The funny thing is that this misquote has re-appeared in all sorts of places. It was this Guardian article that drew me to the odd quote in the first place. Strange how so many people did not question it when it seems to be such an obvious typo! SFB 13:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

It's easier to work from magazine articles than from the newspaper sources. Thanks for pointing this out, and don't fear to point out anything else.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for !voting

	at my successful RFA
	Thank you, Wehwalt, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of Wikipedia's labours. Looking forward to some more coins or politicians on the front page! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Happy to. Obviously a good politician yourself? But alas, given the political climate, that doesn't seem very likely, as I think we've used up all of RHM22's coins ... :)--Wehwalt (talk) 12:51, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oh, I'm not photogenic enough to be a politician :) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:09, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

• Anyone who can get though RfA these days qualifies.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I have to know

Greetings Wehwalt. I can't figure the meaning of your post: "I'll work with anyone willing to do enough work to justify the article being a conom." Is "conom" a typo (which I can't relate) or some jargon of which I am unaware? Thanks - My76Strat (talk) 04:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

• conom=conomination Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:59, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks Ryan, it seems rather obvious now. I guess it's that tree/forest thing. Again, thanks - My76Strat (talk) 05:07, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For your assistance in the promotion of Lynching of Jesse Washington to featured status. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to be so long reviewing it. I no longer follow FAC closely.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem, better late than never! Mark Arsten (talk) 17:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Reawakening

I've been lazy lately but I did notice you broke the ice on Al Davis, need a hand? -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 18:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I thought you were on break but should have dropped you a line. I'd like to get going on Davis. I was thinking that as all three bios on Davis were published in 1990 or 1991, that you could start on the time since then. I could start at his birth and you at his death and we kind of meet in the middle. Welcome back awake.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:38, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

No, no breaks, I was just not really up to the challenge of delving knee deep into an article that I had no ambition to finish but I'm ready to go. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 18:46, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, two heads are better than one on this one.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Ostroh Academy

Hi, I'm sorry to bother you with this -- and feel free to tell me you're too busy -- but I don't know what the proper procedure is. I think the Ostroh Academy article is absurd and have expressed my feelings on the Talk page, but from past experience the probability is that my complaint will simply sit there gathering cobwebs and nothing will happen. That wouldn't be the end of the world, but the situation irritates me enough that I'd prefer it if something were done about it. If you have a minute, could you take a look and tell me 1) if my feelings are justified, and 2) if so, what the next step should be? Thanks! Languagehat (talk) 20:50, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I looked at it and my opinion is this: Yes, you are right, there should be separate articles for the historic school and for the modern school, but as the article is at present so short, it's pointless to split them. I suggest expansion, and then a split will make a lot more sense.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:59, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I decided there was enough material in each section for a split, so I went ahead and did it. Languagehat (talk) 14:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem, but you should look to expand both of them when you have time.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Congrats, ish

#5 on the list! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:23, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid brevity is not my strong suit.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:29, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Eh, at least yours is on someone like Khrushchev. I've got articles at 150 and 178, one on a battleship class and the other on a minor naval arms race. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:07, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I suspect length is an issue which frustrates reviewers, but I find it is very difficult to write short on people who have public careers of half a century. At least no one can say I pad my stats (well, almost no one :) ) Battleships ... I suppose it depends on the history.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:48, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Here We Go Again (Ray Charles song)/archive3

It seems Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Here We Go Again (Ray Charles song)/archive3 is stalling with 3 supports. The nomination is over 2 months old now. Just wondering if you might have any thoughts.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:55, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I will look at it but as I am about to leave for Seattle in the morning, I don't have time for a formal review until at least midweek.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:06, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for squeezing me in. I have attempted to address your concerns. If you have some down time in Seattle, feel free to strike resolved concerns so I can continue making progress on those that are unresolved.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:09, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Happy to do it. You're welcome, for that and for the tys in the review responses.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:46, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Since you might not be following a supported FAC, I am letting you know I posted two followup comments.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I'll look at them.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

‎Possible Queue 6 late substitution or addition

You an administrator who is listed at WP:DYK as willing to help, so I wanted to call your attention to a particularly timely hook for the next queue Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Possible Queue 6 late substitution or addition. You may want to make a late addition or substitution since the Tony Awards are tonight.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I am editing from my iPhone and no way I could do something that complex. If when I'm back on my laptop it's not a moot point I'll look at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:01, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Incivility

Making extraordinary claims against individuals when you don't have any evidence and then snapping at them when they object is uncivil. You aren't required to comment on Jimbo's page and so you can keep unsubstantiated opinions of other editors to yourself. You can strike out your incivility though and apologise. See this relevant section from WP:UNCIVIL:

Take a Real-Life check; disengage by two steps to assess what you're about to say (or have just said). Asking yourself "How would I feel if someone said that to me?" is often not enough, many people can just brush things off, and it's water off a duck's back. So, to get a better perspective, ask yourself: "How would I feel if someone said that to someone I love who can't just "brush it off?" If you'd find that unacceptable, then don't say it. And, if you've already said it, strike through it and apologise.

IRWolfie- (talk) 15:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I have not been uncivil, but thank you for your advice. Perhaps you need to be somewhat more aware of how Jimbo's page is used.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

FAC review?

You did a phenomenal Peer Review a few months ago, and the article is now at FAC. If you have time to do the FAC review, it is at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders/archive1. Cheers. --Noleander (talk) 14:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Certainly, but it may not be until late tomorrow at the earliest. Limited internet access due to travel.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Carousel

Were you content to have the new editor re-insert the longer plot? I'm happy to help you keep it trim, but I'll let you decide. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:43, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

He's busy. Pity you won't let this article be fixed, though. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 04:00, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I haven't gotten around yet to the trimming, but I will.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:42, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:44, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks & incomplete sentence

Thanks for the comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders/archive1. FYI: Your comment appears to include an incomplete sentence: "I should add that Noleander (who has worked very hard on this article)." --Noleander (talk) 12:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. I rewrote my comment and forgot that bit.  :( I'm sure it will pass, just need to plug on through.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

The Concert in Central Park

hello,

do you think it is ready for the last step? Regards.--GoP_T^C_N 13:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I nominated the article to FAC. Regards.--GoP_T^C_N 13:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I need to finish the prose cleanup, and I will do that tonight. Not much left to do. It's hard to say, but I think it stands a fighting chance. The major problem I see is that we now have an article about an album which is really about the concert which preceded the album. I think it is justifiable, given the circumstances, but we will see what reviewers think.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:12, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Adoption

Hi Wehwalt! i hope your'e doing good :) I was looking for adoption from an experienced administrator and after searching and examining the full adopter's list and checking it out, i am pretty sure that you will be one of the best and most suitable adopter and mentor for me :). I am also thinking about getting adopted and mentored by at least 2 users (the other one also being an administrator) and if you know any other user with great skills and experience then do let me know. I am not actually new here and not a new user as i have been quite active here for many months now. But the thing is that adoption is really important for me to pass this basic test, earn more experience in other areas of the project and also get to know the adoption process beforehand in case i want to adopt and mentor my own future adoptee's. And Wehwalt as you have a wide range of experience in many areas of Wikipedia plus in addition to also having awesome contributions in the article mainspace that's why it makes you truly one of the best. I am sure that this adoption process will help me become a far more better and experienced editor and you my friend can help me do it. I will be really glad, happy and thankful to have a mentor like you :) and i'm sure that one day you will also be glad, happy and thankful for having an adoptee like me! I'm looking forward to hear from you. Best regards. TheGeneralUser (talk) 11:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, thank you for the praise. I am happy to have you around and to advise you. I will give the matter of another admin some thought. What are your editing interests?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind response and your offer to help Wehwalt. I generally revert and report vandalism, do copy edits to different articles, patrol new pages, move incorrectly named files to correct names, help other users asking for help with simple problems and have written some article content to a few articles. I currently don't have any editing interests for any particular article (assuming that you are talking about article mainspace, and if not then do feel free to explain me the point again). I edit all the random articles that i can and happen to come across but there are no specific articles right now that i have done any major work on. But i do want to increase and expand my wiki-work in as much areas of the project as possible including the article mainspace. Thanks. TheGeneralUser (talk) 15:41, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

That is good. I will probably not be on later, so I wanted to acknowledge your comment and not feel I'd left you hanging. We're pretty informal around here. I'll put your talk list on my watchlist, look over what you've been up to and we'll talk some more.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:11, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello Wehwalt, just needed to inform you that i have chosen User:Bmusician as my co-adopter as i also wanted to have a formal adoption training experience and they are well experienced and run a good adoption program through their successfully running adoption school. I would also like to know how are you going to mentor me for different things ? I was thinking that as you have a great experience in article mainspace, and writing many DYK's, good articles and help make multiple articles reach Featured article status you can help me in that area and many others too! Thanks again. TheGeneralUser (talk) 12:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that is what I would like to do. I have been traveling and have not yet had time to go through your contributions. I will mentor you on the content side and the practical aspects of Wikipedia (inetrnal politics, that kind of thing). Images are tricky, too. And I can certainly critique your prose.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I looked over your contributions. Nothing wrong with them on the content side, but you'll benefit by experience. I'll help improve your prose and make sure you follow the Manual of Style.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:51, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Washington quarter

This is a note to let the main editors of Washington quarter know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on June 18, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 18, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Washington quarter is the present quarter dollar or 25-cent piece issued by the United States Mint. The coin was first struck in 1932; the original version was designed by sculptor John Flanagan. The new silver quarters entered circulation on August 1, 1932; they were struck in that metal until the Mint transitioned to copper-nickel clad coinage in 1965. A special reverse commemorating the United States Bicentennial was used in 1975 and 1976, with all pieces bearing the double date 1776–1976; there are no 1975-dated quarters. Since 1999, the original eagle reverse has not been used; instead that side of the quarter has commemorated the 50 states, the nation's other jurisdictions, and National Park Service sites—the last as part of the America the Beautiful Quarters series, which will continue until 2021. The bust on the obverse was slightly modified by William Cousins on issues from 1999 through 2009; however, beginning in 2010, the bust was restored to a smaller version of the original of Flanagan's head of Washington. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Congrats once again. :) Well done, Sir! :) You should work on the Two Dollar Bill. I always found that one interesting. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:19, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Ah, the two dollar bill. I remember when they were re-issued in 1976 and how excited everyone was and got them cancelled at the post office. Alas, I don't have the references on paper money, nor the background knowledge. These coin articles pay the bills, in a manner of speaking. They aren't high art, but they are necessary to have in place.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:23, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, seems information on coins is easier to find than information dollar bills. I have always liked the $2 because of the signing of the Declaration of Independence on the back. That is just so cool. I have a couple 1976 issue $2.00 bills, but I have seen newer $2s coming our at the bank recently, more than I had previously. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:58, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Cosima Wagner

Are you able to review this? I've just opened a peer review. It's a bit of a difficult one, a kind of Brundage problem: how to be non-judgemental and neutral about someone who was basically unsympathetic - in fact something of a monster. I'd be glad to have your views. Brianboulton (talk) 20:46, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Certainly, as always writing but it will be a change of pace to review it. It's always a problem, I shall be interested in seeing how you address it.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:53, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For your outstanding support and dedication in getting Yogo sapphire from a new article to DYK to GA to FA and FOUR. The team effort of the uncountable people involved in getting this unique article to FA is a textbook case of teamwork in article improvement, ie, what Wikipedia should be, not what it all too often is. I can never thank everyone enough. PumpkinSky talk 23:15, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for that and welcome back.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:17, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

matching images

• commons:File:John-J.-Lentz-1899-cropped.jpeg
• commons:File:Mckisson-cropped.jpeg

These files "match"

• commons:File:Mark Hanna by WJ Root, 1896 cropped.jpg

I downloaded both originals and cropped them using a selection marquee that had the same xy ratio as the Hanna image. This means that when the three are grouped and sized to whatever, they will all match. I tried to zoom in to about the same degree, too. Compare now with before. The old way had them rendering as different height, and different apparent sizes. Best, Br'er Rabbit (talk) 19:48, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

That's great. That was a worry to me how they looked and what reviewers would say, but I am not adept with images. Thanks for doing that.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:50, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Adobe Creative Suite Master Collection, at your service. Enjoy. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 19:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Infobox

I'll look at it this weekend if not tonight. Cheers, – Connormah (talk) 19:00, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Connormah.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks like you got around to straightening it out already. Sorry, was really busy. Nice article BTW. – Connormah (talk) 22:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem, thanks for looking. Figured it would still be wise to have you take a glance at it. Thanks, it will never get many page views, but it still boldly expands Wikipedia's quality articles to pre-1913 Senate elections. I'm considering doing an article about legislative Senate elections, I think that would be a useful addition.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:09, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

You mean just a general one on US Senate elections? That'd be interesting. – Connormah (talk) 22:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

No, on Senate elections before 1913, when it was by the legislature. The Bybee article is very good, there are lots of contemporary sources, and there's probably a fair amount out there.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:46, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Avery Brundage FA

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for editorial efforts that helped Avery Brundage become a WP:FA.

This user helped promote Avery Brundage to featured article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:28, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you sir! And I thank you for your extensive review which was key to success.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

1907 Tiflis bank robbery article is currently TFA

I just wanted to thank you again for all of your assistance in helping me get the 1907 Tiflis bank robbery article up to FA status. The article is now being displayed as Today's Featured Article on the Main Page. Thanks for all your hard work in making this possible. I greatly appreciate it. Cheers. Remember (talk) 12:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the Technical Coordinator (that is, Br'er Rabbit) told me. Congrats! What's next? You don't come across a story like that every day!--Wehwalt (talk) 15:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Not sure when (or if) I will take another article through the whole process. Some articles that I think are interesting that I would like to see be FA would be zero stroke, Lisztomania (phenomenon), Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age and the Christian Front (United States) (which I think you may be interested in). Are you planning on attending wikimania in DC? Remember (talk) 17:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Alas no. I have gone to Europe and embark on a cruise on Friday. While it is a nice cruise, internet access is very much at a premium. I'm presently working on improving Joseph Foraker, mostly in sandbox at present. I take it you are going?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:01, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I think so. I want to attend the portion where they discuss the legal problems that wikipedia faces. Interested in meeting other wiki-lawyers. Remember (talk) 18:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps another time, then.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:13, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Would be happy to meet up sometime. Remember (talk) 18:28, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

My barnstar

I'm glad you enjoyed the conversation. Unfortunately, he didn't really answer my question. Incu Master (talk) 16:07, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

He never answered mine either, whether he is plotting another lockout over the O'Dwyer case. I actually doubt it, I think the first one accomplished what he wanted, which is to launch him as the god-king of freedom to transmit and transfer copyrighted files unless the copyright owner goes through a very picky process against a fast-moving target. Aw heck, let's just call it freedom to pirate..--Wehwalt (talk) 16:14, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for raising the matter. Note that there is also a related mailing list discussion: [1]. (Note that I am linking to an external archive there, which builds threads. Mailing list sign-up is here, real-time archive for June is here.) JN466 12:14, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Did you mean?

I think you possibly meant 'user talk:Jimbo Wales' [2]. Quisquiliae (talk) 18:05, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. When you recently edited United States Senate elections in Ohio, 1898, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Blade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:38, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for United States Senate elections in Ohio, 1898

Thank you from the DYK team. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Garret Hobart

This is a note to let the main editors of Garret Hobart know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 4, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 4, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Garret Hobart (1844–1899) was the 24th Vice President of the United States (1897–1899), serving under President William McKinley. He was the sixth American vice president to die in office. Hobart served in local governmental positions, and then successfully ran for office as a Republican, serving in both the New Jersey General Assembly and the New Jersey Senate. Hobart was a longtime party official, and New Jersey delegates went to the 1896 Republican National Convention determined to nominate the popular lawyer for vice president. Hobart's political views were similar to those of McKinley, who was the presumptive Republican presidential candidate. With New Jersey a key state in the upcoming election, McKinley and his close adviser, future senator Mark Hanna, decided to have the convention select Hobart. The vice-presidential candidate emulated his running mate with a front porch campaign, though spending much time at the campaign's New York City office. McKinley and Hobart were elected. As vice president, Hobart proved a popular figure in Washington and was a close adviser to McKinley. Hobart's tact and good humor were valuable to the President. Hobart died in November 1899 of heart disease at age 55; his place on the Republican ticket in 1900 was taken by New York Governor Theodore Roosevelt. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

59 minutes notice, me on a cruise ship with no internet access except by the minute and lots of fun like that. Thanks. Hope it doesn't get too damaged.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

It is no joke, these late notifications. Someone needs to get a grip. Enjoy your cruise meantime - the vandals will be repelled. Brianboulton (talk) 21:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Heh. I'm still waiting for a talk page notice for Hygeberht going on the main page tomorrow - the page itself got its move protection but I still haven't gotten a notice... blech. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

59 minutes, again. Should be more like a week. That's autocracy for ya.

damage repelled, pick what you may like. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 00:12, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, no great harm done, but really, this is no way to run a railroad, having the passengers guess at when the train is leaving and where it is going. Thanks to all for their comments and understanding.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:05, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

James Taggart must be still running this railroad. Know the term "redlighting" in a railroad context? Br'er Rabbit (talk) 17:45, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

yes, James Taggart, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Somewhat unbelievable we have an article on him. I've read the book two or three times, generally skip over Galt's 80 page rant.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Cross of Gold speech

This is a note to let the main editors of Cross of Gold speech know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 9, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 9, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Cross of Gold speech was delivered by William Jennings Bryan, a former congressman from Nebraska, at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago on July 9, 1896. In the address, Bryan supported bimetallism or "free silver", which he believed would bring the nation prosperity. He decried the gold standard, concluding the speech, "you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold". Bryan's address helped catapult him to the Democratic Party's presidential nomination; it is considered one of the greatest political speeches in American history. For twenty years, Americans had been bitterly divided over the nation's monetary standard. Many Americans believed bimetallism (making both gold and silver legal tender) was necessary to the nation's economic health. Bryan's speech, delivered at the close of the debate on the party platform, electrified the convention and is generally credited with getting him the nomination for president. However, he lost the general election to William McKinley and the United States formally adopted the gold standard in 1900. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Congrats on a great - and timely - TFA article!

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:36, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Add autopatrol permissions?

Greetings, I've been an editor for four years, and I have various permissions (rollback, etc.) but I don't believe I have "autopatrol" such as User:Sitush recently got. Can I get autopatrol so that my new pages (often several dozen in a week) don't tie up folks at NPP? Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you already have it,--Wehwalt (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

don't know if you can help me

Hi,

I've been reviewing Heinrich Himmler for GAN. Having reviewed already Reinhard Heydrich, I didn't think I'd have a problem. The Albert Speer article was brought up and I looked at it, which you were responsible for.

Would you be willing to look at the Heinrich Himmler and tell me what you think? This is just a feeling on my part, but so much of the article depends on (translations?), opinions by Peter Longerich who I'm getting the feeling has some POV. Did you worry about who did the translations that you quoted from? (I'm certainly not a defender of Himmler, but I think a biography should be a biography and about the human being. It's so easy to just write about the bad guy, instead of seeing the complexity. But perhaps Himmler had no complexity?)

I don't know enough about German history to see that Himmler was worse than Hitler. Hitler is barely mentioned in the article, so everything seems like Himmler's doing on his own. (Maybe this is true. But in the Heydrick article it says: "Historians regard him as the darkest figure within the Nazi elite; Hitler christened him 'the man with the iron heart'.") So whose worst?

If you'd be willing, if you'd read it over and give me your opinion I'd much appreciate it. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:30, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Let me just add that my suggestion that you be consulted was well received at Talk:Hermann Göring/GA1. One of the editors is getting stressed out, and so far I don't know who else's opinion to ask. You seem to do the NPOV thing very well. And I think you have knowledge in this particular area. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I am limited to my iPhone right now but I will try. I did not worry about translations as there seemed no dispute.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:33, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

You weighed in with good advice. Thanks so much. Hope you continue to follow the article and add your 2¢ (or more). Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 14:12, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I will look back in in a few days.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Many changes have been made to Heinrich Himmler. If you could look back, that would be great. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 23:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I will look at it offline, and weigh back in.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I know you have problems with internet connections, but if you would just look at Heinrich Himmler, it would be so appreciated by me. I do believe the article has been immensely improved, but by this time my head is muddled on the subject. Many changes have been made. MathewTownsend (talk) 14:43, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

p.s. and are still being made, even today![3] MathewTownsend (talk) 18:16, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Wednesday do?--Wehwalt (talk) 02:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

yes, yes! I can't make any more comments because I've become too involved. Which is strange since I really know little about the specific figures in Nazi Germany and I'm certainly not a defender of Himmler. Just don't believe in the "one bad man" theory of history: One bad man's fault is like the Great Man theory, only for evil men.

Blaming anti-Semitism seems inaccurate because that wasn't unique to Himmler, and there's no evidence that he was "more" anti-Semitic than many others of his time growing up, no matter what books he read. Didn't others read the same books?

A section on Hitler (as you suggested) would explain what Himmler's contact with Hitler was and could attempt to explain how Hitler influenced Himmler (or was it visa versa?). Seems like they had little direct contact until into the 1940s. Even then it's unclear. The article says: "In the spring of 1945, Germany's chances of winning the war and Himmler's relationship with Hitler had both deteriorated." - but it hasn't explained what that relationship was. I can't believe that Hitler just handed over wholesale a bunch of power to Himmler, unaware of what was going on. MathewTownsend (talk) 20:09, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Wehwalt, your further input is welcome at this point; to see, from the outside looking in, what if anything further needs to be done to get this article "over the hump", so to speak. It is certainly in its best shape ever and a lot of hard work has gone into getting it there by all involved. I am sure Mathew would agree that our common goal here is to improve Wikipedia for the general reader. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 14:59, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I will look back in when I am home on Sunday, hopefully.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:02, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Kierzek (talk) 15:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I feel ok about the article now, but a once over with your expertise would be greatly appreciated. MathewTownsend (talk) 23:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Heckle heckle. Ping!! Don't know if I'm sane anymore. MathewTownsend (talk) 21:06, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Certainly such an early ping would argue cogently against it.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:13, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Whot!! Whot's early about my ping? What kind of early are you talking about? MathewTownsend (talk) 22:27, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I said I would look at it on Sunday, just above.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

But my Sunday's almost done! MathewTownsend (talk) 22:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the "once over" as to Himmler, Wehwalt. Kierzek (talk) 01:49, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for saving my hide and righting the wrong! MathewTownsend (talk) 13:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Turned out to be quite a review! No problem. As soon as I get caught up, I do intend to look into the Hitler/Himmler thing a little closer.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to be a nuisance...

Sorry to bother you, but I wonder if you caught my reply, two or three days back, to your thanks note on my talkpage? I asked if you could possibly look at Cosima Wagner, currently pining at FAC. You may recall peer-reviewing this a while back. As I say in my note, the problem is that nearly all the "music" people are either off for the summer or have retired or gone into hiding, so articles like this are struggling for reviewer attention. I may have to take up military history. Brianboulton (talk) 16:51, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Er, no, I hadn't seen it, what with the travel. I will deal with it today, as I am home after spending yesterday in flying aluminum shells. Perhaps military music? Assuming there is such a thing?--Wehwalt (talk) 17:13, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

help desk

I do't get the meaning what you wanted to say there. Gooing22 (talk) 21:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Asking who the model is who is wearing clothes can be read to imply that you are differentiating between multiple models, who may be distinguished by adding that one is wearing clothes. Probably not what you intended. I don't know who he is, btw. Nice hoodie though. I'd order one if it didn't mean putting money in the Foundation's pocket.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:39, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

JSTOR

Wehwalt, I'm at a working group meeting for the education program and the question came up of JSTOR access for Wikipedians. I know you were involved in that discussion - did anything come of it? Has the foundation decided whether or not it can or will fund that kind of research assistance to editors? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't have any present involvement with that, the last I've seen on it was here. As I understand it, they were getting JSTOR to donate some accounts, which is a bit disappointing to me (I do have JSTOR, twice) as I'd like to see the principle of the Foundation spending a little money to aid editors established. Hope this helps.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Carousel (musical)

Please check out the talk page and recent changes to this article. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:09, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Hammer. Nail. Door.

	Wikipedia Reformation
	Glad to know you. Alarbus (talk) 12:59, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It is good to know you too, and good to have my allusions recognized!--Wehwalt (talk) 13:04, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. NB: many miss allusions; pictures help them tag along. Alarbus (talk) 13:08, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for "amore e studio elucidandae", compare "beginning enlightenment" on my user page", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Nice! Well, you have to start somewhere.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I just added on top. And brought "He was despised" back a few days ago, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

That is really nice. And you saw what Alarbus and I are discussing ... I've been meaning to renovate my user page for some time, it's much too boasty right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

My personal Liberty Bell (see below): top of my talk :) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

More Luther: Aus tiefer Not schrei ich zu dir, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

How well deserved: your latest FA star for a murdered one! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, he was murdered just like a Shakespearean character ... and by an assassin. I like your Liberty Bell.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:02, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

My latest Man of Sorrows, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:17, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Man of Constant Sorrow -- Dianna (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

For anyone not getting that, they are playing off what my name means in the original German. Perhaps so, but there are joys now and then.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:03, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I was referring not to your name but first to the sorrows of others, our sorrows being only the consequence. He was despised, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I changed the dedication to the second to last Man of Sorrows, appr for Good Friday (he doesn't like the colours of the other, not good for the blind, I keep working on it, see Passion on my talk), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:04, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I worked on it: it's now a decent black and white. Dona nobis pacem. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:43, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, also for the Good Words. I will look at it tonight or tomorrow.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:52, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

• Nailin' stuff to doors, are we? So, how many theses are we nailing to the Castle Church door this time? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 11:41, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

As many as it takes.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:45, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, Luther got excommunicated (as well as all the Lutherans...and the Catholics still won't talk to us today over it) when he nailed his 95 Theses to the Castle Church door in 1517, but meh, why not? :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:20, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Luther got banned, that means he could be killed with no punishment for the killer. In Germany, the Catholics talk about it, we call it Ökumene, (see witch hunt, see pic of choir with a singer dressed in pumpkin colour, the Catholic choir sang in the Protestant church Nun bitten wir den Heiligen Geist in Luther's words, Did you know ... that the first stanza of the hymn Nun bitten wir den Heiligen Geist, asking the Holy Spirit for the right faith most of all, is documented in German in the 13th century, and the later three relate to faith, love and hope?), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:31, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Lutherans and Catholics have tried many times to get along, even as recently as September 2011, but there are differences that just never seem to get fixed and screw everything up. Some of the US Lutheran denominations are trying on their own to talk to the Vatican and kinda come together and let bygones be bygones. But some think that will never happen, because of those same differences. Oh well. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:44, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

That should not stop us from acting on "faith, love and hope" (a little older than denominations), - as said above, you have to start somewhere, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

You did it! To quote you: "Just tellin' it like it is. :)" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Seriously so: Vier ernste Gesänge, did you know ... that Johannes Brahms composed two major works about death inspired by the Luther Bible, his Requiem as a young man, and those, when close to his own death? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:41, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Did you know that the writing on faith, love and hope is the text of #4, the culmination? Did you know that the article on the songs says "more" about Kathleen Ferrier than the Main page on her day (22 April)? Compare, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I did review the article as it came through and I regret it did not run with a better blurb.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:29, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

So did I. The "blurb" was announced about an hour before it appeared, when the author was probably asleep, and I didn't feel knowledgeable enough to ask for a change. I think such articles should be announced at least two weeks before to the project involved (not just one expert), in this case Classical music, to get the article polished, red links filled, and the blurb written as a decent summary, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, and that time also allows editors to veto their article's main page appearance, rather than scrambling at the last moment, as TTT had to.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

"Ist nicht des Herrn Wort ... wie ein Hammer?", we heard this and your comment in a staged version in the theater pictured on my user, staged by Jens-Daniel Herzog: when the fire fell, all PC screens went black ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:24, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Choir pictured, and more, perhaps I should add to the article, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Seems very worthwhile.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:19, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I added a bit, not knowing how to phrase the interaction between the "Masse" (crowd?) and the single man whom they cheer (there actually were cheerleaders! presidential campaign came to mind) but who in the end feels severely misunderstood and leaves the podium, - they keep cheering, not really missing him, - chilling scene. The music was presented intact, complete, and well performed, - I sang it three times, once here, once as a summer sing in English opposite Carnegie Hall, once here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I did not know you had attained such heights. Certainly, the story says something about Wikipedia, where we seem to cast out those who do the most, and keep the do-nothings.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Heights in choir, of course. - The story also says "Wer bis an das Ende beharrt, der wird selig" (Matthew 10:22), and I remember the first conductor having us sing the "beharrt" (more active than "endure") section very insisting and heavy on the repeated notes, the upward melody of the other with almost immaterial sound, blessed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Thought about the opening line, "vor dem ich stehe", wondering if it translates more or less to "what I stand for"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Did you know there's a musical connection to "your" president? - Will reform refs, then nominate ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan!--Wehwalt (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Half-way with the refs, nominated, alternative with Mr. President ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Good to go, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Good--Wehwalt (talk) 08:03, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

New perspective --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:38, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Nice to see another quality article of yours, United States Senate elections in Ohio, 1898,, no, I did not know, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad you like it. It was what I could write in the time I had at home before leaving.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

One more step towards independence with Vice President Garret Hobart making history! Fireworks! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I grew up in New Jersey, where Hobart lived, and it was a pleasure dropping New Jersey place names into FAC. I doubt half the reviewers knew how to pronounce "Passaic"!--Wehwalt (talk) 16:32, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) "Puh-Say-Ick". At least that's how the natives pronounce it ;> Doc talk 08:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Yup, though I'm a Bergen County boy myself. My brother lived in Hawthorne for a few years, though.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Nice to see this with increased value ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:01, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Siegmund

I thought of the name change from Wehwalt to Siegmund when I nominated this (on the Main page now) and added it to my personal memories, remembering Die Walküre, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

That is where my name comes from, specifically from Hunding's call "Wehwalt! Wehwalt!" near the end of Act II. When I took a tour of the Festspielhaus 20 years ago, I sang it quietly to myself from the stage. And I saw it live in Bayreuth in 1990 and 1996 (when I went in 2005, it was a year without a Ring).--Wehwalt (talk) 14:42, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

A Ring here, a gem there: are you watching a precious article, seeing the latest dramatic news? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:27, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I saw, thanks to you. How terrible.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:31, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

For an uplift look at this gallery: Düsseldorf school of painting including a familiar one, artist on the Main page, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:07, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

How dismal. :)--Wehwalt (talk) 09:41, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

2401 (hits yesterday for the inspirational people under oppressive conditions), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Passion: He was despised --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:43, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Easter: eggs and peace --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:18, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

And to you. We seem to be getting some article work done amid the drama!--Wehwalt (talk) 12:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the eggs! - Did you see who also got article work done? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

That is good. I've got books open and ready to go!--Wehwalt (talk) 12:12, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Article work: Vier ernste Gesänge, more on Kathleen Ferrier than what you could read on the Main page on her day, 22 April, seriously. Not as serious, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:47, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

• "you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold", seeing these words of reason in TFA makes me think you should consider to change your name, awesome Wikipedian of 20 September 2009, 4 December 2010 and 16 February 2012 ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Zhirinovsky's ass

This is entertaining; makes a nice section header, too. Don't miss the talk page, with 3, count'em, 3 requested move discussions. (noticed this on WP:Great Dismal Swamp. Best, Alarbus (talk) 05:11, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, made my day! (I found out just yesterday that who did that first here did it the day after my first year. I try to follow the example, you know, also makes a nice section header.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Best wishes, Gerda. Buck 11:35, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy Easter --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:45, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Equines! Montanabw^(talk) 20:53, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		Thanks Wehwalt for helping to promote United States Senate election in Ohio, 1898 to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up, and give someone a pat on the back today. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 04:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Louis Riel (comics) FAC

Hi! Mark Arsten recommend that I ask you to take a look at Louis Riel (comics) (which is up for FAC), as you've brought John A.'s article to FA. Would you be interested in taking the time to look it over? CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 23:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but it may take a few days. I have much promised and little done.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:05, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Peer review

I have unveiled Reginald Heber at peer review. It's one of my remedial exercises, to get over the stresses and strains of the Wagner family, quite untopical and guaranteed to raise the ire of those who think FA subjects must be popular. I don't think he'll gain much attention - I very much doubt that you'll have heard of him - but I'll be pleased if you can find time to look the article over. Brianboulton (talk) 11:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I shall. I have not heard of him, but one of the pleasures of Wikipedia is stretching one's mind into new areas. Thank you for your promptness with the Senate article; I will nom it in a day or so once I look it over to make sure everything is as basic as it can be under the circumstances.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, still working on Pres. Nixon and Supreme Court

Hi Wehwalt,

I'm still working, want to include at least some details about Carswell and other nominees. Might take some time.

On an unrelated note, any chance you might have some interest in concussion, post-concussion syndrome, football? FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 18:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

No, not too interested in that topic, I'm afraid. But one of us will get to Nixon.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Avery Brundage

I just noticed Category:Athletics US NC champions templates. I recall he was a three time national champion. You may want to look for a template with his name on it or create one from this source. I just created templates for Tora Harris and Augie Wolf. It takes me about an hour and a half to make each one after getting all the dabs straight.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I will look at it. The all-around seems have to gotten short shrift on Wikipedia.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:10, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I may have to research this. He won no individual events. I will have to find a list of all-around champions.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Wtshymanski at it again

I saw your post in 2011 at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive690#Wtshymanski failing to work collaboratively. Now he's at it again with an AfD for Switched-mode power supply applications. Electron9 (talk) 03:02, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I glanced at it. I really don't have a lot of time to take a major role in this, but I will be glad to follow and weigh in if appropriate at any discussion.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Help me keep the article? ;-) Just thinks he wastes the editors time with this annoying merge, delete and remove tactics. Electron9 (talk) 03:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll put the discussion on my watchlist,--Wehwalt (talk) 03:29, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Joseph Foraker

I noticed some time ago you changed the name of Joseph B. Foraker to Joseph Foraker, with note that it was the more frequent search term. Re-directs would take care of that issue. I think the article should have the middle initial, as he always signed his name that way, and his autobiography used his middle name. Others seem to have always addressed him with the middle name or initial.
Roseohioresident (talk) 21:56, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll switch it back. Any thoughts on the article?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:58, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Seems factual and documented. That's all I look for.
Roseohioresident (talk) 21:31, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Ryan

So much for my ambition re: Al Davis. I guess it'll be a slow moving project. Anyway, I'm thinking about giving Rex another go at FAC. Thoughts? -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 18:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

There's no hurry on that. I've temporarily back burnered it anyway. What I would suggest on Ryan is to bring in someone like Giants2008 who can give it a dispassionate, neutral outside look.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Well I pulled the trigger and I'm giving it another go after consulting Giants and Eagles. If you have some time, I would appreciate your input. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 17:22, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Certainly, I shall find time shortly.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Wehwalt. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

You can haz mail, nao? Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC) 02:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

My apologies

Hi Wehwalt,
I am really sorry for responding after 2 months. I was caught up in some work that is why couldn't work on the Jinnah article. I have corrected the lead paragraph and removed all the references from it and placed them in the body where they could have been used. There are some tags added in the article about which I haven't yet found any references. I had also raised this concern on the talk page about 20 days ago but I think that other editors also couldn't find any WP:RS. You can take a look at the article whenever you find some time and let me know if you think of any additional changes which should be made to it. I really appreciate your help :)
Thank you
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 19:57, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, let me refresh my memory. I still have the JSTOR articles on my laptop. I just got home after a lengthy trip, it may take me a day or two to catch up.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi,
So is there any more work that you think should be done on Jinnah? I have also adjusted the images a bit as they were scattered all over the article. Some work on the citations has to be done and I am still working on that. Any more suggestions?
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 11:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I went to the library and got a book, so I need to look it over. I'll try to get to it today.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay. That's great. Thanks a lot.
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 13:41, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I am notoriously slow, I am afraid, and my current article is giving me fits.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I would start with the lede. The first paragraph is generally fine. However, after that, I would, in the remainder of the lede, go through Jinnah's life chronologically, at least the highlights, while of course concentrating on what he is best known for, his leading the Muslim League and advocating establishment of Pakistan, his role as GG in independent Pakistan, then what he is remembered for.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not thrilled about the style of referencing. Would you be willing to talk with my technical guru, User:Br'er Rabbit about the article? Also, I think you should merge the criticism section into the other sections of the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:06, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay. I'll leave a message on Br'er Rabbit's talk page. As for simply merging the section of criticism into the whole article, I was thinking of upgrading it by changing the heading to Personality and public image as mentioned in the article of Richard Nixon and by adding the image of Jinnah as a whole instead of just leaving negative comments in the section. But you are a better judge for what's right for getting the article to a FA status, I just thought to share my opinion.
Thanks
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 12:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I spoke with Br'er and he's happy to help improve the references. Always a good idea to have a section for those things that made the person memorable, but which don't fit easily into a chronological recounting. My current article is Joseph Foraker, I am planning a section "Views and oratory" which will have much the same purpose. The book I got is the Wolpert one btw.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Is it Jinnah of Pakistan? I have tried numerous times to get my hands on this book but was unable to find it in the libraries. Legacy section does need little work as Wolpert's quote has been mentioned there and is without a page reference. As for the heading, "Views and oratory" is also a good one. Br'er Rabbit has also started working on the article so I think it would be in a better condition soon.
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 09:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I have removed all the unsourced material from the article and have also placed them separately on the talk page so that one can easily see what sentences I have removed and if someone is having any RS, he can add them back.
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 10:11, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes that is the book. It will probably be a few days before I am ready to do much work on it, I want to wrap up Foraker first.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:24, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

That's great. You can take your time on the Foraker article. In the meanwhile I'll try to finish everything else in the Jinnah article.
Thanks!!!
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 17:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wehwalt,
I saw some of your edits on Jinnah article. Thanks for the help. Though I have noticed some edits, that you told me earlier shouldn't be in a feature article, made by some editors. Like you told me that a reader doesn't care what Jinnah said. Like these Saying 1, Founding of Pakistan, Jinnah's vision for Pakistan and Governor General. Similarly there shouldn't be any citations in the lead paragraph (like the one used in first line). I have a lot of books written by known authors of Pakistan on Jinnah, using them I can put more information but there are already a lot of problems which need to be rectified first. So if you suggest I should remove some sayings of Jinnah, I will and raise the issue on the talk page as I think it's already been a long time and by now, it should have attained a FA status.
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 15:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I figured the lede could be cleaned up later. I am reading the Wolpert book and will be back at the article once I've done. I'll be more effective in editing it with better knowledge of Jinnah's life. While I am a reasonably well-informed person, I will confess to not knowing all the details! I agree that it is not wise to have excessive quotations from him, but a few well-chosen ones will help the reader grasp him as a person. I am sorry it took so long but I didn't finish Foraker until a few days ago.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I have come across a lot of editors here. Trust me, you are the best one I know and I truly respect the way you work. Working so much on getting the articles to a featured article status and simultaneously handling every editor with respect, believe me it's amazing. You don't need to be sorry. :) Frankly speaking this is my first time getting an article up for FA, so I am quite excited for it and you are the best editor/guide I know. That is why I seek and tend to follow your every advice on the subject. You can take your time to read the book. I'll try to clean up the article as much as I can on my own behalf. Once you are ready, you can let me know if you want me to make any additional changes. I'll be happy to help.
Thank you
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 20:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I would wait, if I were you. I've already seen stuff I think should be rewritten. I think the article needs to be more chronological than it is (I'm up to 1928 and his separation from his second wife). Thanks for the praise, I'm starting to agree with you, this article needs to be better than it is. I am also going to call in my image guy on that passport image and see if he can do it as a 2x2 rather than having the four pages in a row like that.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

You are right. Some stuff in the article needs to be rewritten. I'll wait then, till you finish the book. Just drop me a message whenever you feel that I should come. And yeah, the passport does has an irregular kind of shape.
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 21:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

FYI

• Ched]PumpkinSky talk 22:23, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Seems to be closed.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Stephens City Article (Part: One Billion)

In reference to the email I sent you yesterday, this is the sentence about Virgil E. Watson I added (with source) to the Stephens City article. I am just a little concerned about it just being a two sentence paragraph (if it can even be called one). I am unsure if it can be joined into another paragraph in that section or not since they are all about different subjects. What do you think? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:30, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

It's probably OK where it is, I didn't see any way to add it logically to one of the other paragraphs in the section. You could add it, if you wanted, to the end of the first paragraph of the Demographics section, though in that case I would begin it "The first African American on the town council ..." rather than with the date, though still include the date. It's editor judgment, I don't see a major issue either way.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:47, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, I will leave it where it is in the "History" section. Seems better there, I was just worried about the paragraph problem. Thanks! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Foraker

Done - I autotraced it this time to match the penstroke texture. Sorry for the wait. – Connormah (talk) 05:07, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:00, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Asking for help....

My new friend, Wehwalt, I am Tamravidhir. I recently nominated Tourism in West Bengal for FA but it was declined, I have a to-do list here and here...I request you to help me. Please help me. When replying please leave me a Tb template. Thank you so much! --Tamravidhir(২০১২) 13:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I have been in touch with User:Moonriddengirl and more others..and they have been really helpful. However, they are packed up with their own to-do list so Moonriddengirl asked me to come to you. --Tamravidhir(২০১২) 13:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

As I do not know anything about the subject matter, I do not think I could be of help to you. Try the next one down the list?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:04, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

) --Tamravidhir(২০১২) 15:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

It's generally not a good idea to take some from B to FAC. First take it through WP:GAC and then WP:PR PumpkinSky talk 16:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

There is a request for you at RFPP regarding an article you protected, Dick Pound. Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 08:00, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

You know why today was heart-warming! PumpkinSky talk 02:36, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

May we share it? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, of course, I'll revert the other things when I get a chance.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:32, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

sweet ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

When I was in Istanbul last month, they had scrumptious pastries, but none as sweet as this.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I LOVE baklava. The best I ever had was, yes indeed, in Greece. PumpkinSky talk 22:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I brought home pistachios from Greece, there is a slight bitter taste that makes them great. Very had to come by in this country.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:02, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

FACs

I see that Foraker is there, and I will get to it soon. Joseph will shortly be joined by Reginald Heber, and I shall be glad if you will keep an eye out for this, as it seems to me to have "likely to be ignored" written all over it. Brianboulton (talk) 17:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think Foraker's going to be very popular either, though thanks for your efforts. Everyone's gone for the summer. Wish I was. It has been brutally hot here. In any event, I shall be glad to make Heber feel un-neglected, to the extent I can.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:07, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RfA. I appreciate your sentiments, and especially in the confidence you expressed in me. Much obliged.

To return the favour... have you ever considered running for ArbCom again? I mean, don't feel pressured into it — the choice is entirely yours. But if ever you decide to stand for election once more, know that you will have my full support. Yours is a unique and reasoned perspective, one which I've found very valuable in my past encounters with you.

By the way, I just took a piece of baklava (see above). Hope you don't mind. =) Master&Expert (Talk) 23:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem (also on the baklava). I have thought about it but am waiting until the writing is too much of a chore.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:05, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Wow, so I take it you're quite the workaholic. Way to be. Good luck. =) Master&Expert (Talk) 00:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Thx, you too.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:17, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for United States Senate election in Ohio, 1898

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on United States Senate election in Ohio, 1898. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Another quality article, excellent election, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Thx, forgot to nominate it over there, but Tony is efficient.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Jinnah

Hi,
I read the article up till Fourteen points as it is up till 1928. If you ask my overall point of view till that heading, it's commendable and superb. Now the article seems to have a professional touch and I really like the way you have changed the Early years part. Previously it was a cluster of links. Some points, which I think should be changed, did catch my eye. Like in the lead paragraph, there is a link present on the Gujrati language. It should be removed as I checked the link and there isn't any Gujrati script present there, so it's useless. In the second paragraph of lead, should (congress) be mentioned after writing Indian National Congress? Rest of the lead seems good to me. The third paragraph under the Break from Congress is about his wedding and wife. Shouldn't it be in his personal life, somewhere in Return to India? Dina Jinnah is still alive so I think it should be "continues to live in India" in the last line of Fourteen points. Rest of the article has greatly extolled my expectations. Now it seems polished. Great work.
Thanks
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 20:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Those details can be easily adjusted. I will look at those things. Thank you for your good words. I did not know Dina Jinnah was still alive. I am still going through all the sources to figure out how tell the reader what happened.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

On the wife/daughter matter, I intend to merge the content into other parts of the article. There's no reason this can't be told chronologically, Jinnah's personal life separates well into discrete mentions, marries, has daughter, wife separates and dies, Fatima comes to be with him and plays a major part in his life. All of that can be told to the reader as it happens. So far so good, but this was the easy part.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:24, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

That is true. Chronologically would be quite difficult. Fatima Jinnah did become an integral part of his life and played a phenomenal role in creation of Pakistan. Other then these things, nothing came into my notice which should be changed. Rest of the article seems good to me.
--Inlandmamba _{(talk to me)} 10:02, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

The King and I

• User talk:Ssilvers#The King and I

Hi, Please see the above. I think it's past time to finish reworking the last of the articles you've taken to GA/FA. Mostly it's the musical theatre ones and, as you know, I've some decades experience there. A pity this one's GAR was scuppered. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 03:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Wehwalt, would you kindly ask Br'er Rabbit not to edit this article until I have had a chance to consider his comments? He seems to think that he is executing your instructions. I hate to bother you with this; I promise to consider his comments and work on them tomorrow. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:34, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

And I saved my edit over the edit conflict you just gave me. You removed my reply from your talk, make outrageous attacks, and have an ownership attitude. I didn't say I was "executing Wehwalt's instructions", I said I was working with him. See most any article he's taken to FA and you'll find me working with him on it. Sheesh. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, Wehwalt, would you mind archiving the old discussions at The King and I? Only if you think it's a good idea. All the best. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm asking you both to pretend your conversation did not occur. I'll look at the archiving issue. Let's start again, please.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:36, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment - talk page stalkers welcome

Hi Wehwalt (and talk page stalkers of Wehwalt) - I was wondering if anyone could give me a hand - I'm planning to create an article on I. B. Thompson, (Ira Bowman Thompson), an Alabama legislator from Luverne, Crenshaw County, Alabama. Preliminary searches online turn up that someone named Ira B. Thompson from the same area was a part of the local Ku Klux Klan in the late 1920s. Though I cannot 100% link the two, I'm 95% sure they're the same person - see a bio here mentioning the rep.'s service in France - [4] (ch. 4, pg 216) and the klansmen's - [5]. More searches show they were both attorneys in the area at the time and so on. No biography in the state register mentions the rep's participation in the Klan. We can also see that the state rep. was a captain or served in the military of some sort from the military uniform he's wearing in this 1947 composite photo - [6]. So the question is - are the two linked? If I make an article on the legislator, can or should I include the KKK stuff in it? Could anyone else possibly sniff around for things to link the two? I think this can be a good DYK if I can work out all the links, but this is a toughie. Thanks! – Connormah (talk) 08:19, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I will look into it as time permits. I have no plans to go anywhere near Alabama soon, so no chance for local research.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. A little online searching should suffice. I'm almost completely sure they are a match, but I'd just like to see something more concrete. Thanks again. – Connormah (talk) 13:32, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

No question they are the same guy. I don't find anything that both calls him a former state representative and a klansman in the same reference, but there are a couple of NY Times articles mentioning him, one calling him the local head of the Klan and the other mentioning that when he was indicted for his Klan activities, the grand jury denounced him and mentioned his "control of the affairs of the county" (the other article mentions how the case against him collapsed, the attorney general walked out of the case). Let me know if you want screenshots of the articles, I will email them to you.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:26, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

If you could send the articles, that'd be great, thank so much. I'll probably get to writing this tonight (need to pull up all the other articles I've skimmed). You have my email address, yes? Thanks! – Connormah (talk) 19:07, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Forgot to drop by and offer thanks. Much appreciated! – Connormah (talk) 23:11, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Main page blurb...

Someone's felt the need to insert an image of Gregory the Great into the blurb - but it's not an image that's even used in the Gregorian mission article and it's 1000 years past Gregory's date. Unfortunately, it implies in the blurb that this is what Gregory looked like... but the blurb page is protected. And of course, no one notified the talk page of hte article either. I'm so sick of TFAs... Ealdgyth - Talk 01:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

oh, what I wanted to ask was .. can someone fix this? At least put in an image that's IN the article??? Ealdgyth - Talk 01:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

How about File:Gregory I - Antiphonary of Hartker of Sankt Gallen.jpg? -- Dianna (talk) 02:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm fine with that, as long as it's clear it's not a contemporary portrait (I'd say it's assumed from the type of image, but I never assume that sort of knowledge about your everyday person any more... historical and artistic knowledge seems lacking at times!) Thanks, Diannaa. It's really very aggravating to have this sort of inaccurate pictures on the front page. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:10, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay. I have finished the edit. -- Dianna (talk) 02:16, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

David Levy has reverted my change. Sorry. I guess I can't help you after all. :( -- Dianna (talk) 02:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I reverted because that image is extremely difficult to discern at thumbnail size. Note that I was unaware of the issue discussed above, which wasn't mentioned in the edit summary. —David Levy 02:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Ealdgyth:

Did it occur to you leave a note on my talk page? —David Levy 02:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I've modified the text to explicitly indicate that the portrait was painted in the 1620s, as I would have gladly done if asked. —David Levy 02:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Except that Ealdgyth, the author of the article, doesn't seem to think it appropriate. I'd suggest removing it and only adding one agreed to (and some clark deals with the protection). Br'er Rabbit (talk) 02:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

1. Ealdgyth's concern appeared to relate primarily to possibility of confusion regarding the image's provenance.

2. Please see WP:OWN. I certainly value and respect Ealdgyth's input (which is why I addressed the aforementioned concern as soon as I became aware of it), but an article's primary author has no special authority to approve its content, let alone that of the main page.

3. I don't know what "and some clark deals with the protection" means. —David Levy 03:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Street-Legal Sockpuppet
 Br'erRabbit 
03:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

1) you might ask, 2) I know about OWN; we all do. Ealdgyth would have specific knowledge here. Do you? You editing through protection just because you can? 3) see Clark; clerk, as in a mop to deal with the local upload and protection. Meanwhile, Ealdgyth is probably asleep, so this is going to have at least half the 24h in your preferred state. Congratulations. fyi, we've meet; I was Jack; also Alarbus which has a most excellent scrolling mechanism (ya, it takes over the scolling of much of the screen; that's by design).

1. I'm participating in this discussion (of which I'm aware because Diannaa informed me).

2. Indeed, Ealdgyth has specific knowledge of the article's subject, but no facts are in dispute.

As a main page regular, I have specific knowledge of its image usage and experience managing it. That doesn't give me special editorial authority, of course, but I have a good understanding of what's expected (including the knowledge that the 100px width sometimes necessitates the selection of an image not used in the featured article, where that isn't an issue).

Ealdgyth complained that the image's provenance was unclear and later stated that the use of a non-contemporary portrait was acceptable "as long as it's clear it's not a contemporary portrait"). So I edited the blub specifically to address this concern. (From your message, one would think that I told Ealdgyth to go pound sand.)

The section is protected purely to prevent vandalism. The phrase "editing through protection" usually refers to abuse of the sysop bit to edit a page protected due to a content dispute. —David Levy 03:58, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Above, Ealdgyth asks for an image change. I do see the thumbnail legibility issue with the images in the article. On talk:main page, Ealdgyth asked that the image you added be removed as inappropriate. You've reverted another admin over this, too. You also usurped teh authoritah of teh Featured Article Dictator who arbitrarily selected no image (you get a personal pass on this from me, though). Ealdgyth was 'fine' with the non-contemporary image that you reverted back out. This is a time-critical situation as the page is live now. The others are not editing presumably due to sleeping, while much of the world is getting your image at something like a thousand hits a minute. I'd say this was a content dispute that you insisted on having your way. nb: I barely know Ealdgyth; helped with an ISBN some months back. I only noticed this because it's on Wehwalt's page. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 04:26, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Above, Ealdgyth asks for an image change.

...primarily due to an issue that's been rectified. In your view, what justification remains?

I do see the thumbnail legibility issue with the images in the article.

So you understand why their use in the TFA section is unfeasible.

On talk:main page, Ealdgyth asked that the image you added be removed as inappropriate.

...primarily due to an issue that's been rectified.

The only other rationale is the fact that the image doesn't appear in the featured article (which Ealdgyth evidently didn't realize is normal in this circumstance).

You've reverted another admin over this, too.

I reverted the replacement of an image easily recognizable at 100px with one that isn't. At the time, I was unaware of the underlying reason (which wasn't noted in the edit summary). I discussed the matter (apparently to Diannaa's satisfaction) at User talk:Diannaa.

You also usurped teh authoritah of teh Featured Article Dictator who arbitrarily selected no image (you get a personal pass on this from me, though).

Raul typically checks the featured article (but not related articles) for suitable images. It's quite common for other administrators to subsequently insert images found elsewhere, and I don't recall Raul objecting. (If he did, he'd have a major argument on his hands.)

Had I not inserted an image, it's all but certain that someone else (most likely Neelix) would have. That doesn't always go well.

Ealdgyth was 'fine' with the non-contemporary image that you reverted back out.

...because it was practically unrecognizable at 100px.

And again, I've applied Ealdgyth's stipulated measure to make the use of a non-contemporary Pope Gregory I depiction acceptable. So what issue remains?

This is a time-critical situation as the page is live now. The others are not editing presumably due to sleeping,

To what "others" are you referring (whom in addition to Ealdgyth)?

while much of the world is getting your image at something like a thousand hits a minute.

And the problem is what, exactly? That Ealdgyth hasn't personally approved the inclusion of the free, highly relevant image — a notable artist's painting, used to illustrate Pope Gregory I in our article about him? For this reason, you believe that it would be better to display no image?

The view that we must display an image in the TFA section (even if it means illustrating a film with a photograph of the janitor who swept the floor of the studio in which it was shot) is held by a substantial number of users. I'm not one of them. I've frequently argued that we shouldn't throw in an image for the sake of having an image, and I've reverted such attempts on multiple occasions (including this one). The most recent discussion is only days old.

There's significant resistance to the idea of declining to use tangential images (and we've ended up with some major stretches), so there certainly is no consensus for the omission of an image that's directly relevant (and thumbnail-suitable). If a free one is available, we use it. The article's primary author doesn't have veto power. (And I reiterate my sincere belief that I've addressed Ealdgyth's concerns.) —David Levy 05:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I just sat down at keyboard with a cup of coffee. I think I'll read this later.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:02, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Late to the discussion: it's tricky to illustrate a mission, best not to try, if you ask me. - English is not my first language: can you really call a "portrait" the invention of an artist painted centuries after the person's death? I think of the famous one of Mozart, carefully labelled "posthumous painting". In that case real portraits of the person existed, I doubt that for Gregory. - I saw "imaginary portrait". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

TL, DR. But it looks like it's been resolved. If not, I will be happy to help out. Good to see you, Ealdgyth., others.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster defines "portrait" as "a pictorial representation of a person usually showing the face". It's unlikely that someone reading "1620s portrait" will be led to believe that Pope Gregory I posed for the painting more than 1,000 years after his death. —David Levy 11:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Nonetheless, I've switched to "1620s painting". —David Levy 11:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

(ec twice) TL? DR? - it's "portrait" on the Main page, looks wrong to me, adding "imaginary" or another qualifier would help. - after ec 1: the innocent reader gets the 1620 image FIRST, before even reading, only then is s/he told that it's about 6th century, misleading, no? - I would be happy without any pic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Again, I've switched to "painting" (not that "portrait" was incorrect). And I'd be happy without a picture too, but the community at large disagrees. I intervened to ensure that we didn't end up with something absurd. —David Levy 11:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

If the "community" prefers a misleading pic to no pic, that's what it gets, misleading by 1000 years, impressive. Thanks for the change to "painting"! Any chance - if we have to have that picture - to mention the mission date first, the painting date later? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

While I agree that no image is necessary, I disagree that the display of a notable artist's posthumous depiction of a person (clearly labeled as such) is "misleading".

I don't see an obvious way to reverse the date order, but I welcome any wording suggestions. —David Levy 12:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

My POV: I see the picture and think it's about something Baroque, I turn away without reading further. - "The Gregorian mission was a missionary endeavour in Anglo-Saxony in 596 AD, initiated by Pope Gregory I (1620s painting pictured)." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

The reordered sentence is much better with the relevant date early. David can you please make that change? --Mirokado (talk) 12:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Done. I tweaked the suggested wording (because the mission continued beyond 596 and I'm not sure that "Anglo-Saxony" is correct). —David Levy 13:04, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

ps: I read "a pictorial representation of a person usually showing the face" and can't help thinking that the painter has to see (not imagine) said face to produce a "portrait", no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:56, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily. —David Levy 12:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't get how that relates to my personal "I can't help thinking ..." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

You were asking whether you can't help thinking that? Okay, that's for you decide. —David Levy 13:04, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

In my biased view, in doubtful cases, we should defer to the wishes of the principal writer, as it is by his (or in this case, her) grace that we are able to feature it on the main page at all.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

(ec) good freaking gods. I left a message on the main page and pinged an admin I know before I went to sleep. I note that the painting currently in the blurb is cropped, why was it impossible to crop the manuscript illustration likewise? Instead, it was more important to reinsert the 1000 year past image, rather than doing the crop on the manuscript. As far as the community disagreeing - I've had a number of articles run on the main page without images without anyone feeling that there MUST be one - Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 29, 2010, Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 12, 2011, Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 24, 2011, Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 30, 2011, Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 4, 2012, Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 5, 2012 - so that argument that the community demands an image is sort of moot here. But whatever, it's not like I have any knowledge of what goes on the main page - I've only shepherded 51 or so featured articles, of which Gregorian mission is the 21st to appear on the main page. Yep, I know nothing. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Let me take a look at cropping the manuscript illustration.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Ealdgyth: I've cropped and uploaded the image and replaced it on the main page. It was automatically cascading-protected, it looks like, so I think that should be OK if the crop is satisfactory (not my talent).--Wehwalt (talk) 13:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

THanks. I hate being a pain in the butt about this, and thanks everyone for their help. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem. Given the present last-minute schedulings, we all have to pitch in together.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I tried to help because I share your view, no pain at all ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Our cascading protection doesn't extend to Commons, so the image was unprotected (and subject to replacement by a vandal) until a Commons bot cascade-protected it there. Fortunately, that fallback occurred after approximately two minutes. (It usually takes much longer.) In the future, please upload the crop to Wikipedia and tag it {{m-cropped}}. Thanks. —David Levy 14:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I was going to upload a local copy, but by the time I did, the bot had take care of matters. Thanks for the reminder though.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:22, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

In the future, please perform the local upload before transcluding the image. A few minutes might not seem like much, but there are vandals who will exploit the window it the timing works out for them. Thank you. —David Levy 15:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Again, when I reinserted the image, I had no knowledge of this issue (which wasn't mentioned in Diannaa's edit summary or conveyed to me via my talk page). When I learned of this discussion, I sincerely attempted to address your concerns (by explicitly noting the painting's provenance). At no point have I questioned your contributions to the encyclopedia, and I sincerely apologize if something that I wrote came across in that light.

My goal was to intervene before Neelix could insert a photograph of a car with "Gregorian mission" painted on the side. I'm truly sorry that my good-faith efforts offended you and grateful that my egregious blunder has been corrected via the use of a different non-contemporary depiction of Pope Gregory I. —David Levy 14:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

That point did not escape me either ... but as it is what Ealdgyth requested, I assume that given her knowledge of such things, she deems it better, and as I have little knowledge of events prior to "free silver", I'm inclined to take her recommendation.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:24, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I would prefer the map image ... it gives a good indication of what the subject is covering without any issues of contemporariness. But since Diannaa worked with the manuscript image, my point was that instead of reverting back the painting because the manuscript was "too small" - the same process of cropping (that had already been applied to the painting) could have been applied to the manuscript rather than a blind revert ... as to the contemporariness - at least the manuscript is recognizably medieval art - and is about 600-700 years closer. It also has the advantage of looking more "cartoonish" and thus people are less likely to think it's a direct likeness. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Would you like me to switch it?--Wehwalt (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Nah, not worth the bother. Only 8 or 9 more hours to go... Ealdgyth - Talk 14:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Detailed maps are the worst possible images to display as 100px thumbnails. —David Levy 15:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

My reversion was "blind" because the reason behind the image replacement wasn't conveyed to me (including the edit summary, "different image"). I knew only that Diannaa had switched to an unprotected image that was practically unrecognizable at 100px.

Is there a particular reason why you didn't leave a note on my talk page? I'd have gladly discussed your concerns, which weren't fully clear to me from the messages that you posted last night. (I sincerely believed that I addressed them.) —David Levy 15:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't object to the current image's use. (I don't think that it works as well as a crop, but it's more than adequate.)

I take issue with the manner in which my actions have been assailed. I set out only to improve the section. I sought a suitable image, which I then cropped, resized (via two scaling methods, manually blending the outputs for optimal results), cleaned up, sharpened, and compressed via a separate program.

Ealdgyth had genuine concerns, and rather than expressing them on my talk page, she came here to complain. When Diannaa informed me of this discussion, I sincerely attempted to address the aforementioned concerns (by incorporating the requested notation and explaining that the use of an image from a related article isn't unusual). In response to further criticisms, I then modified the blurb twice more. (I didn't agree that there was a problem, but I respected others' views and made every effort to satisfy them.) —David Levy 15:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

(ec twice, again) thank you, David, twice, for a good change and for letting me decide ;) - and you running this page for reminding us that we owe thanks to the primary author first, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

• Perhaps this is not the right venue to discuss this =)? Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 14:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

This is a venue that works ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I am going to belabour the obvious for a minute here; none of this would have happened if Ealdgyth had had more notice as to the main page appearance; only 25 hours notice was given. There's even been some cases recently where only one hour's notice was given: Here's two examples: Manchester Ship Canal (Malleus, July 19; 59 minutes notice); Garret Hobart (Wehwalt, July 4; 59 minutes notice - While Wehwalt was on vacation with limited internet). For Gregorian mission, the pic was not added until one hour before showtime; this was at 11 pm in the UK; working people might already be in bed by that point. While David Levy's point is valid that the primary contributor does not own the article and does not have any veto over the image selected (if any), surely their input is desirable, especially with more esoteric subjects where some specialised knowledge would be helpful. Their statement here led me to believe that the clothing in the 1620s painting, for example, would not have been what was worn a thousand years prior. If the articles were selected a week ahead of time, or even a few days ahead of time, these issues could be ironed out in advance. -- Dianna (talk) 15:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. All of us could have done better work — individually and collaboratively — in such a scenario. —David Levy 15:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Given that acknowledgement, what changes in procedure are going to take place? It is indeed the case that none of this need have happened given longer TFA notice, but if Ealdgyth got 25 hours' notice she was fortunate; on several recent occasions I have received 59 minutes notice, via a bot. That's one minute after midnight BST when I am likely to be in bed, asleep or otherwise engaged. What really riles me is that these last-minute notifications still contain all the thunderous guff about consulting Raul if the date is inappropriate and about editing the blurb, etc., as though there was still all the time in the world. Why has the practice of last-minute notifications become standard.? I have raised the issue with Raul but got no explanation; can you do better? Brianboulton (talk) 16:41, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

There have been several times when Raul has undertaken to give more timely notice. What gets me is that it is disrespectful. Seven day's notice would be plenty of time to settle any remaining matters, pull the article's socks up, and get it on the main page with a bit of polish.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:58, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

It appears that many of the notifications are last-minute because the selections are as well. As to why that's occurring, I have no idea. Given Raul's appointment of a delegate to share the workload (Dabomb87), it should be easier to schedule articles well in advance. —David Levy 17:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I concur entirely.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

It should be easier, but apparently it isn't. The mixture of incompetence and complacency among those running this show leaves me speechless at times. Brianboulton (talk) 19:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, this train wreck is about over; new TFA shorly after I post this. The problem, as was previiosly dicscussed, is a combination of a failure of leadership and poor approaches to the whole process. The arbitrary nature of it all is bullshite. The whole FA process should be a more colaborative one, without an autocrat and without "delegates" weilding that power. TFA should be collaboratively selected at least a week in advance, as should the blurbs and images. It's past time for the dog-mangering to end; all that's left is the bell. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 23:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Another result of management in abstentia. PumpkinSky talk 21:58, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

My position has not changed since January. Whoever performs the job of Featured Article Director, assuming we need one, needs to be actively running things, and to be responsive to the needs of the contributors. He is the boss of a small business, and in addition to advocating for its interests, needs to be the one who sweeps up if his employees do not have time. At the present time, we are adrift. I would suggest as an interim measure, that Raul be asked to appoint a second TFA delegate, with the instruction, "keep a week ahead". And dare I suggest the community make a recommendation to Raul?--Wehwalt (talk) 00:06, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I went to leave a note for Dabomb to alert him to this, but he hasn't edited since July 21. It would make sense for someone (Wehwalt, Brian?) to propose a firm 7-days' notice on WT:TFA, and perhaps also to suggest an additional TFA delegate for when Raul and Dabomb aren't around. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:35, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It had better not be me because of my association with the RfC.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hail and farewell

I am sending this note to Wikipedians with whom I have most closely collaborated over the last six years or so. After pondering hard during a month's wiki-break in July I have sadly decided to withdraw fully from contributing. I have been worn down by continual carping, sniping and belittling from a wearisome few (you know the sort of people I refer to); the joy has gone out of taking part in this wonderful enterprise. I should be more resilient, but alas it's finally got to me.

Working with you has been a pleasure and a privilege: I count myself fortunate to have had such colleagues. My warmest wishes go with you for the future. I shall be happy to do any research, copy-editing, fact-checking etc you may ever feel inclined to ask me to do – but safely offline.

With my very best wishes,
Tim. (Tim riley (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC))

I respect your wishes, and often have desired to do the same but cannot face the endless boring hours. You are one of the people I write for (I cannot see, or comprehend, the people who actually read the articles for information) and I deeply regret seeing you go. Please remember the door does not lock behind you. Please continue to consider it an extended wikibreak.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

A request

Perhaps you could pass along this request to Mattisse: User talk:Philcha#Free image of Philcha. Cheers. Kaldari (talk) 22:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I shall, thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:14, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much.

First I want to say thank you so much for respecting my ineptitude when it comes to FA/TFA things. The fact that you would take the time to privately clue me in on the process regarding my question speaks volumes about your integrity. To be quite honest, I was outright afraid to approach Raul on his talk page about this. That's why I posted on the TFA talk page. The article I am interested in is Amazing Grace. I think it could probably use a little TLC before going on the main page (a few refs in the lead could maybe be done away with) - but I absolutely LOVE the whole concept of forgiveness and acceptance. I may ask User:Br'er Rabbit to have a look at the references as he seems very astute in the current methods. (I'm wondering if the "reflist" thing is a bit "2008".) Anyway - question: How much should the "blurb" follow the way the lead is written? Or is it better to say it in "my own" words? — Ched :  ?  22:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

You are very welcome. You are probably suspect through association with me, though! I use the lede as a basis, but fill in to give context and make things read better, as long as it accurately reflects the article, of course. Feel free to nominate it, of course. Br'er sounds like a good person to call on to me.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Request for arbitration

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Featured article process and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Rschen7754 09:10, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For bringing Joseph B. Foraker up to featured status. It's incredible how productive you are. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:32, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

RevDel on user talk page

Please explain: how was your action on User talk:Anthonyhcole a legitimate use of RevDel? Gimmetoo (talk) 18:10, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

It included a first name.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:44, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Part of a username that the user used. Not private information. How is this a legitimate use of RevDel? Gimmetoo (talk) 18:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm talking about the name listed first in the post.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:52, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

So am I. Gimmetoo (talk) 18:54, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

If he has, I am not aware of it (I would ask that you not post the name if I am wrong). I'm reading intent into it.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:56, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

By analogy, User:Anthonyhcole chose User:Anthonyhcole as a username, "Anthony" is part of that. If someone uses "Anthony" to refer to User:Anthonyhcole, I don't see how the RevDel policy would support its removal. Gimmetoo (talk) 19:08, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I think you two are talking past each other. The first name that was rev-del'd, if I am reading this correctly, is a name that the editor has not included in any of his usernames. Am I wrong about that? Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

That's my understanding. That's why I did it.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

So how do we verify that we're talking about the same username, without mentioning it? Suffice to say that the name in the RevDel'ed edit summary matches the name Wehwalt identified in the RevDel'ed edit. Gimmetoo (talk) 19:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'm not sure why someone would WANT to verify a real life name that hasn't been disclosed on wiki. Our policies are pretty clear on respecting the anonymity of our editors. If something's been RevDel'ed, I figure it's none of my business. Maybe I'm missing something here. — Ched :  ?  19:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

The name that was RevDel'ed was part of a username. It is not private information, and so the RevDel appears inappropriate. Gimmetoo (talk) 19:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

We will agree to disagree, then.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:46, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

You have failed to explain how your use of RevDel was appropriate or legitimate. As such, it appears to constitute administrative misconduct, and that's before discussing the issues of INVOLVED and the intimidation effect of using administrative tools in that manner against User:Anthonyhcole. Gimmetoo (talk) 19:52, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Gimme .. Wehwalt removed a "name" from a post. A name that has not ever been associated with the user or account to which it referenced. This is NOT any attempt to "intimidate" ANYone, or anything "against" Anthonyhcole. It's a respect for privacy. I don't understand what you're not getting here, or how else to explain it. — Ched :  ?  20:03, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

The name I saw was indeed part of a username the user used. It's not a privacy issue. Gimmetoo (talk) 20:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Very well, as is customary, I will seek a neutral oversighter.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:11, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Very well. You select someone, but let me know so I can query also, without you feeling that you would have to reveal anything on-wiki. Gimmetoo (talk) 20:14, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm working on it.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:44, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

You may certainly both proceed as indicated if you wish. However, I noticed that Anthonyhcole has indicated that he himself has no problem with the striking (though he would have appreciated being informed at the time what the issue was). I suggest that this issue could stand to be dropped at this point. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:46, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)w/Brad. Gimme, my real name was mentioned. Some people know this and I have said so a few times on-wiki, but I don't call attention to it. Anthony went there and it was appropriately removed and MarkA and Brad have commented on this. You're involved up to your ears with me and your efforts here are trolling me and Wehwalt and are simply more indication that you're unfit for adminship. Hope that's sorted out at some point.

• Video on YouTube

Br'er Rabbit (talk) 21:52, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Gimme, I did talk with an oversighter on IRC, who advised me re Streisand effect, but given Brad's comment, and Br'er's, I'm dropping the matter. You are free, of course to seek an oversighter and of course I'll cooperate, but I think this is a good time to lower the drama quotient.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Wehwalt, yes, the Streisand effect. Not only did you misuse the tools while involved, your use of RevDel was counter-productive to your supposed purpose. You are apparently unable to use the tools appropriately in situations involving your wiki-friends. Gimmetoo (talk) 05:18, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Quit trolling, Gimme. You're the one seeking to draw attention to the use of my real name. I've recently suggested desysoping Raul. You should be too. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 06:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Gimme, if you want to talk about misuse of tools, go to the case page, there's a few doozies over there. As for this, you have expressed your opinion, which was not shared by the editor in question. I see no further purpose in discussing this.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Remove Reviewer user right

Hello Wehwalt. Some months ago you had granted me the Reviewer user right from a request at the Help desk, now you can remove that from my account. Seeing as the Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Reviewer have started again which weren't active at that time, I will add the request there and let another Administrator approve it in a proper way which i'm sure will be done. Thanks for having your trust and faith in me which i am confident that i will always hold it true and keep it up :) Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 11:53, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, no problem, I will do that momentarily. Good luck. Let me know if there is any issue.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:00, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Seems like a very odd request, especially considering Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Reviewer isn't really giving Reviewer to those with Rollback. The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy. Worm^TT(talk) 12:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

If they don't give it to him and he wants it back, I will oblige him. In the grand scheme of things, we want happy editors.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like an excellent solution to a problem waiting to happen. Worm^TT(talk) 12:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Lol.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Footnote gentlemen. I see it has been granted to him. Kierzek (talk) 01:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Ryan

I was on a roll but I'm having trouble getting at least one more supporter, any suggestions? By the way, congratulations on Foraker, excellent read. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 13:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll see if I can find someone.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

You might want to ask Brian to look again, I see he reviewed and you addressed his concerns but he has not supported yet.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Oh I meant to tell you I've been working on the NFLPA article and I think it's coming along quite nicely. I have a story about Miller being removed from a photo but I'm not sure where to place it in the article thoughts? -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 14:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll look it over but it most likely won't be until tonight or tomorrow. I'm sure that image is pd, but someone actually has to look at the publication (likely one in Canton, if one of us ever gets back there) to see if there's a copyright date. The problem with Davis is how to talk about the last 20 years of his life, which were after all the bios were written.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

That's fine. I'm not too concerned about the image itself but the story to add some color and present the owner's state of mind about the association at the time (I just don't know where would be best), the image would be a bonus. I don't know if they have it in the original article or not as I don't have a subscription. I looked on the Browns' website, it appears they still hold a grudge. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 20:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I've emailed you the NY times article. I need to look at RHM22's Gobrecht dollar (he has retired, alas) and then I'll look at NFLPA. I remember looking at it at some stage, but never hurts to look again.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Last time you saw it the amount of pro-player POV would have made Rex blush. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 14:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll look at Rex. PumpkinSky talk 14:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, good. See, there are benefits to posting here! I'm up to 197 talk page stalkers, more than even in the FA fracas in January!--Wehwalt (talk) 15:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

196. Someone got bored. An arb perhaps?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I have only 99 ;-( PumpkinSky talk 15:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Bumma. Br'er's got only 88 though.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Now I have 101, I wonder if it's due to this thread. Hmmmm. I wish that damn tool told you who they were. PumpkinSky talk 22:22, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I have 490, of which I'd estimate that at least half are just waiting for an opportunity to block me again. Malleus Fatuorum 23:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Seeing the uninformed comments over at the arb case request page, I'm starting to come around to your point of view.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:00, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Pages needed

HST and Kafak have several books used by prior editors with no page numbers. I've added the proper parameter to the ref but how does one deal with this when trying to achieve GA and FA? Let's assume one can't find the book in question.PumpkinSky talk 21:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Even snippet view on Google Books can do wonders.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, in the 5 in Kafka that needed pages, I found 2. Can you help with the other three?PumpkinSky talk 23:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll look at them but if they aren't on google books I don't know what good I'll do. Don't expect it tonight. I have to copyedit that TFA.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Are you really sure that you want to use Cliff Notes as a source? On the Truman one, I find it perhaps info can be found elsewhere. I'm planning to start some work on that maybe this weekend, on HST.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Will look for a replacement for Cliff's. Also, on Kafka can you do a copy edit on or before 30 Aug so Gerda and I can GAC it by the CORE deadline of 31 Aug? PumpkinSky talk 23:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, not a problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks! Vielen Dank! PumpkinSky talk 23:58, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll try to do it as quickly as I can, but I'm pretty tired tonight and tomorrow is pretty much shot.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:12, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I was able to get a pretty good preview of Corngold 2004, and page xii backs up the attendance at the Gymnasium, but does not give any details as to its location, and passing the Matura exam does not seem to be in the book. I solved the Nabokov one; and the third one does not seem to be backed up by the cited source. Sorry about the edit conflict, PS; I think I patched it up ok. -- Dianna (talk) 02:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Diannaa! I found a ref for the Matura thing. So we're down to one page needed - Mann & Heller, and a good copyedit. @Wehwalt-no problem, and thanks. PumpkinSky talk 02:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Find a university library with it in it, and ask some college kid to have a look? Resource exchange?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:55, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't have time for it to get here.PumpkinSky talk 01:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

No, not interlibrary loan. Just ask a kid to go get it and take images of the relevant pages and send them to you.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Just found it in an ebook.PumpkinSky talk 01:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Images

Replied at my talk page. If this were FAC I'd oppose straightaway. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:35, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

That's why I'm trying to get rid of those images.  :)--Wehwalt (talk) 22:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

New email address, pay attention TPS

I am changing my email address, and the cox.net address probably won't work after September or whenever I cancel their service, in favor of a gmail address. I have already changed my email address with Wikipedia. I will probably eventually get to sending out change of address notes but I have about a hundred or so places to change my email on, so it may take some time.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Albert Speer

I have made another comment on the Speer talk page and I would like to hear back from you on it.TL36 (talk) 17:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The Games

must go on, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I see! I am very glad. They must go on the main page, it seems. It should be an interesting day, judging by public reaction so far to the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Ref desk

Hey, do I recall correctly that you're a practicing attorney? If so, this question[7] on the ref desk could use your expertise. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:02, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Resp there.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Seated liberty

I'll do the coin article. Perhaps you'd take a look at The Rite of Spring? I haven't got it to PR yet, but it should be there some time tomorrow. This was originally a joint project with Tim, which I've carried on with. I'm still hoping he will make a few suggestions offline which I can introduce. There is now no one other than me that I know of, who is working on featured classical music/opera articles (though see something on my talkpage about Beethoven). Brianboulton (talk) 22:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Happily. I've been meaning to get back to the uncompleted Rodgers and Hammerstein, but have been distracted. I would certainly like to do Madama Butterfly with you, but I know you are heavily booked. Perhaps this winter?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

My plans are always subject to change, but at the moment I want to see The Rite through to FAC, and will possibly polish up Tim's unfinished Pierre Monteux, if he wants me to. Another composer project, Peter Warlock, is dependent on my getting some JSTOR access and may be on the back burner for a while. I am also doing a literary project on the fictional character Kenneth Widmerpool, and am trying stir up interest among other literature editors, past and present, with a view to work on more literature articles, sadly under-represented at FAC recently. But I'd welcome the chance to work on Butterfly a little further down the line. Brianboulton (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I have Muhammed Ali Jinnah done, but I'm going slow with it due to image problems and to make sure everyone's on board with what I've done. It will probably be a multiple conom situation, that's not quite clear yet. I'm taking a few days away from writing but next weekend will get back into it helping PumpkinSky return Harry S. Truman and Grace Sherwood to FA. The next coin will probably be Barber coinage, there is an article in this month's coin world and I have several sources. I will throw in a reference to his death to satisfy you. As always, feel free to impose on JSTOR, but I know that nothing's the same as having it. (taps foot, looks in direction of St. Petersburg, glances at watch, sighs, urges hurricane on)--Wehwalt (talk) 21:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Err...

diff this sort of cut and paste move is bad, right? I've left a note on the user's talk page, but ... err... I'm kinda flabbergasted that someone would just do that... Ealdgyth - Talk 21:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

It looks mad. I've reverted. Let me know if there are further problems; I will sit on him and you hit him.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Heh. So now we have TWO articles on the same person - David fitzGerald and David FitzGerald. LL had redirected the "fitz" to the disambig page but copy-pasted the contents of the "fitz" page to the "Fitz" page with this edit. I'm fine with the "FitzGerald" spelling (although I prefer the fitzGerald) but something needs fixing and I suspect we're into admin terrirtory here... help! Ealdgyth - Talk 22:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I've obviously misunderstood, then. Let me take a second look. I'm sorry, I'm tired.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:51, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Why won't reversion to the status quo ante on both articles work?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:53, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

It'd work, but then we'll deal with a move somehow. I'm fine with it moving ... just not the manner in which it got moved, since it lost the page history. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Got it. So the article, with the history, you are willing to accept under Fitz though your personal preference is otherwise, right?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Yep, looks good now. Thank you, and sorry to bug you when you're tired. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

(ec) We can't have two articles on the same person, we all know that. One should a redirect to the other. I vote/!vote for keeping the Fitz one, just my two cents. And it should be listed on a dab page too. Do a history merge on the articles and make the one being nuked a redir. Just my thoughts on a way ahead...perhaps too late after the edit conflict. PumpkinSky talk 23:03, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Ealdgyth: No, that's fine, glad I could help. Don't hesitate to ask, I need to keep those admin tools from getting rusty. ps: I think I will leave it as is, which accomplishes the same purpose. I'll doublecheck the dab page for consistency.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:08, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Gobrecht dollar image

The image of the Gobrecht silver dollar from the Garrett collection that you uploaded about a year ago is a scan of a halftone print from a catalog, and it shows all the printing screen artifacts. Was this intentional, or was it due to lack of de-screening capability in your scanner software and/or subsequent image editing software? It could be improved by removing the screen, and I have succeeded doing so in GIMP with the Descreen filter. Any thoughts about replacing the image? You can examine the cleaned version here. A bit of the screen is still visible, but applying more aggressive filtering results in loss of detail. — Quicksilver^{T @} 18:36, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea. I do the best I can. I put the item in the flatbed and hit the button. I made a lot of images the day I was at the ANA library last July. I am not technical. I have a better scanner now and hopefully it will do a better job next time I am in the same situation. Advice welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I just looked at the cleaned up version. It is very nice. You're suggesting I upload it to replace the existing one?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:53, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, go ahead and upload it under your own name, if you like. — Quicksilver^{T @} 22:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, I will do so. I'm on a short business trip and I'm rather busy with other things so it may await my arrival home on Thurs. Thanks for doing the work. I suck at image processing!--Wehwalt (talk) 22:51, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Bagatayam Waterfall

Hi Wehwalt :). Hope you're doing good! I recently came around this article Bagatayam Waterfall and i think it currently does not meet the basic minimum requirements for a Wikipedia:Stub. The article only has a external link to flicker website of a picture and a external map link. There are no other reliable sources and references. If possible can you have a look at it and see what can be eventually done ? I believe your help will be invaluable . Regards. TheGeneralUser (talk) 20:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll look at it, but it may not be until tomorrow.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, you got me interested, and I looked at it. I see it has been made a redirect, and I agree. The fact that there are no independent sources about what looks like a rather handsome small waterfall raises an eyebrow here. I could find nothing about this on the web except a few brief mentions that may derive from us. I would be very careful. I do not say this is a fraud or anything like that, though it may be. It may be something as simple as spelling variations between English and Tagalog, say. But I would suggest not allowing the article to be resurrected without iron-clad sources.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Big Brass Balls Award

An award for ......this post, asking the arbs why some admins are more equal than others PumpkinSky talk 23:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Ooh, shiny toy. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Small request

I have been helping User:Sarastro with Learie Constantine, which is doing pretty well at FAC, but needs a sources review. Could you possibly do this? Not spotchecks, obviously. I don't myself see any problems on reliability, but there may be the odd formatting issue, etc. Brianboulton (talk) 10:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

It won't be until tonight, but I will be happy to if none of my Talk Page Stalkers gets there first!--Wehwalt (talk) 10:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for doing it. The article was promoted immediately afterwards, though my share of the credit is small. Brianboulton (talk) 18:27, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Still essential, no doubt. Congratulations!--Wehwalt (talk) 23:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Jinnah

Sorry, just saw your message on Commons while going through emails today. I'll see if I can get to it tomorrow. All is well, though it's been pretty damn hot, humid and stormy up here.... – Connormah (talk) 03:41, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

There's no place to go to escape the heat, then. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:36, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

And as promised, File:Quaid passport burhan-2.jpg, best of luck at FAC with the article! – Connormah (talk) 00:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you kindly, finding free images is proving a task so we are not quite there yet.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

John A. Macdonald

You reverted my edit to the caption on a period cartoon following the defeat of Alexander Mackenzie, Canada's second Prime Minister, by John A. Macdonald who was, incidentally, also Canada's first Prime Minister. Actually, my original intention was simply to change Mackenzie to Alexander Mackenzie to ensure that there was no confusion with William Lyon Mackenzie King, rather better known simply as Mackenzie King or just King. However, since he was (by the time of the cartoon) no longer Prime Minister but rather a former Prime Minister or (more specifically) the outgoing Prime Minister, I added that detail while I was editing. I think this maybe a little more detail, but not too much since I suspect that most visitors scan the page and just read parts... Anyway, just my impression.
Enquire (talk) 06:41, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I think we have to assume that people read the text, not just look at the pictures, but perhaps if we gave Mackenzie his full name, but left out the "outgoing", we'd compromise. Mackenzie King served a long time as PM, but surely not 1878!--Wehwalt (talk) 08:36, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Done! ~ Enquire (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Alright, great. I enjoy those cartoons, they beat the heck out of another portrait of Macdonald's face.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Rite issue

Sorry to ask, but could you briefly revisit Wikipedia:Peer review/The Rite of Spring/archive1 and pass an opinion on the soundfile issue I have raised at the end of the review? I want to decide whether this file is worth keeping but other reviewers have not taken this up. The soundfile only lasts 12 seconds so please listen to it. Brianboulton (talk) 22:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

William McKinley

May I nominate William McKinley for the 14th September, 2012, for featured article?Lucky102 (talk) 20:42, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

If you like, and Coemgenus does not object. The difficulty is, we've had three articles on the 1896 campaign this summer (Garret Hobart, Cross of Gold speech, Simon Bolivar Buckner). The articles I've worked on belong to the community, and I will not stand in the way.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:49, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Amazing grace, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:10, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!Lucky102 (talk) 08:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

It's not the best timing but it will get 2 points for first FA nominated by me and date relevance.Lucky102 (talk) 09:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, you were not a significant contributor to the article so you probably won't get the rookie point, which is only for own work.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Will it get 1 or 6 points for date relevance, since it is the 111th annisversary of his death.Lucky102 (talk) 09:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Only one.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Could you possibly tell me how many points it will get?--Lucky102 (talk) 20:18, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Three, I guess, one for anniversary, and two for widely covered. It may lose points for proximity to Buckner, but I'm not sure on that.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your help. I will nominate it now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucky102 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I have a bit of a problem. I have the right formatting (I think) but it is combining into the next nomination.Lucky102 (talk) 21:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you put it.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

coming soon --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:54, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Truman memoirs

On HST, we need a consistent way to cite his memoirs. Some refs currently say "Memoirs 1", "Memoirs 2", etc. Others use the actual title, such as "Year of Decisions", which I THINK is the same as "Memoirs 1". What method should we use here. Then there's the issue of all the people to lazy to put a page cite in with their book ref, which I'm tagging with "page needed". PumpkinSky talk 12:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at how I did it on Joseph B. Foraker, at Br'er's suggestion, on the memoirs. As I go through, I am eliminating the "page needed"s, either by supplying info from another source, or by eliminating it. We need fewer website citations and more books. People will be looking for high-quality sources.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:25, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

OK on memoirs. On online refs, over half are the Truman Library or TIME. Shouldn't those be okay? PumpkinSky talk 13:11, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, those should be OK. Not as thrilled about PBS though, I am having trouble finding the info and it may be in the actual episodes, rather than the text, I think we should avoid that if possible.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

FYI-title: Memoirs, subtitles: Year of Decision (Volume 1); Years of Trial and Hope (Volume 2), author: Harry S. Truman, publisher: Doubleday, year of publication: 1956, PumpkinSky talk 15:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Old currency conversion

Do you have any idea where I can find a converter for 1938 Straits dollars to (either contemporary or present) dollars or pounds? I'm pushing to get Terang Boelan to FA. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I have a currency table for you from the NY Times and an article, both from 1938. In practice, it looks like it traded at a value of about 57 cents to the US dollar. If you send me an email, I will send you screenshots as attachments, plus the links you'll need for the ref and all that good stuff.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:18, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Sent. I know we're not allowed to convert to modern currency in-line, but would a footnote be acceptable? I think the inflation calculator goes that far back. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• I didn't know it was a rule, if it is, it must be recent. I avoid it because there is no intelligible way to bridge very different economic conditions. You could live on what would be a pittance today back then because labor was cheap, so even a widow on a fixed income could have a houseman, maid, and gardener and still live comfortably on the remainder. Fifelfoo is the guy you want to go to if you desire a lengthy and complete explanation, but I would suggest (merely that) listing the conversion rate in 1938 and also the total sum if it isn't clear at a glance (i.e., you don't have to translate $1,000 Straits dollars beyond the conversion rate but I would if it was $567,240.01.)--Wehwalt (talk) 12:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• I think I read that it was akin to original research, if I'm not misremembering my admittedly spotty understanding of how we handle currency. I get most of your post but the parenthetical. So perhaps "200,000 Straits dollars (then equivalent to US$[amount] or £[amount])" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd use US dollars. And I agree, it's close to OR.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:29, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Something like this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Looks good to me.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

No problem, feel free to come back if there's more needed.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Sure. Might ask again it I try to push Pareh to FA. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

A Puppy for you! :)

TheGeneralUser has given you a puppy! Puppies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your puppy must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a puppy, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of puppies by adding {{subst:Puppy}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks a lot being a Faithful Companion and a Good Wikifriend :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editor review/TheGeneralUser (2) Your review is required and will be greatly appreciated :)

Hi Wehwalt ! I have started my second editor review at Wikipedia:Editor review/TheGeneralUser (2). I will be greatly delighted, thankful and valued to have your review for me regarding my editing and possible candidate for Adminship. As you are a experienced and long term Wikipedian so i have asked for your kind review. Take your time to review my editing and give the best review that you can :). Feel free to ask me any questions you would like to on the review page itself. It will be a great honor to have you review me for which I will truly feel appreciated and helpful! I always work to improve Wikipedia and make it a more better place to be for Everyone :). Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Rite of Spring

Just to let you know that The Rite of Spring, which you recently helped improve via the peer review, has now been nominated at FAC. Any further observations will be welcome there; I hope someone will review the images. I have followed the PR consensus, and removed the substandard soundfile; it is possible that this decision will be challenged, but we shall see. In your own time, of course. (PS don't do puppies, alas) Brianboulton (talk) 22:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

A round of applause is in order

I was scouring my Twitter feed and came across this little gem. Apparently in Chris Kluwe's rant about the officials there was a Heidi reference with an obligatory link to our FA. Hooray? -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 19:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I suppose. I suspect the ref-bashing has more to do with union solidarity than competence. Speaking of which, I haven't gotten back to NFLPA yet, what's the box score look like there?--Wehwalt (talk) 19:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it's mostly completed. As for the NFLPA, perhaps a few tweaks here or there but I've looked over it so many times, I cannot decipher what needs what. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 01:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I'll look it over.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:29, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

John A. Macdonald

May I nominate John A. Macdonald for article on main page for the 17th of October, since you seem to be a significant contributor to the article, I am asking you. Thanks! --Lucky102 (talk) 20:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

No, I would like to save it for the bicentennial of his birth in just over two years.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:41, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, that's alright. Thanks!--Lucky102 (talk) 21:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem. Appreciate the thought.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:10, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Good Article Review

What do you think of this review? I know it's not that good, but it's my first review.--Lucky102 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

You should blank that and let someone serious review that article. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry!--Lucky102 (talk) 20:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Usually, people are hoping for detail in a review. Look at other reviews and see how they are done.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

for example, - or look in the history of any GA, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:36, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Lucky102 && Talk:Milan/GA1
• Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#User:Lucky102 && Talk:Milan/GA1

deleted. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 13:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

HST PR

• Wikipedia:Peer review/Harry S. Truman/archive1 PumpkinSky talk 21:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Nouveau Political Science How to clean up politics

Chapter One Nouveau Political Science

Suppose political science was defined as the study of politics, reduced to its fundamental or elemental particles, and compounds, and finally the forces that control the interactions between them. The elemental particles would be citizens, lawyers, lobbyists, legislators, executives, judges, administrators, and civil servants. The compounds would be the bodies politic, such as legislatures, the executive branch with its vast array of administrative machines, the courts with citizen juries, and political parties of all sorts. The forces are laws.

Next suppose that in the discipline of political science we were able to factor out all the prejudice, preferences, perceptions and misperceptions, political bias, and the irrational influences of political parties. Excised would be the misconceptions caused by media misinformation, educational mythology, and the distortion of political rhetoric. Suppose reason could be substituted for the prejudgments we have held since youth. The psychological inertia of long held convictions about this party or that, and the unquestioned economic “verities” we long held as truths could be exposed as mere half-truths of little use. They would simply fall away from consideration. By exercise of reason, we would have nothing but pure political science.

Political Science would now become the cold reasoned dispassionate study of the forces that control these “elements” and “compounds”. This study, properly done would simply be a study of fundamental truths or principles upon which all citizens, regardless of political party, can agree.

For example, Aristotle, in his book titled Politics, made three memorable statements, upon which all can agree. He told us:

   The proper “business” of government is to create justice for its citizens
   That a government that does not create justice shall not long stand
   That justice is a specie of equality: equal rights for equal citizens

Because governments are judged by its citizens on its ability to create an environment for prosperity for those who care to make meaningful efforts towards productivity, let us look closely at the activities of those in charge of our governments; federal, state, and local. We find today our governance has become simply the creation, enforcement, and sale of economic privileges to any person or organization that cares to bid for them. Allowing our politicos to sell privileges creates problems.

The first problem with grants of economic privileges is that they act to destroy our national prosperity. Here is how. There exists a privilege/opportunity equilibrium: each privilege government creates diminishes, ever so slightly, the liberties and opportunities of all the remaining citizens of that society. When these privileges are economic privileges the consequences of these grants over time become enormous. Economic opportunities end up in the hands of a few successful bidders, usually the corporate “citizens”. The consequence of grants of economic privilege is that we have allowed our politicos to destroy our middle class. Notice the decline in jobs and paychecks. Look at the dreadful erosion of pensions and savings. Look at the paucity of jobs for our children, and the paltry pay packets in their future. By this means we are destroying our national prosperity. These United States, used to be known around the world as the land of opportunity. Today we are merely the land of bought and sold privilege, and we lead the world in campaign contributions.

The second problem with grants of economic privileges is that makes dispensing equality an impossible job for our courts. Citizens come demanding their rights, and corporations come demanding their expensive privileges be honored. How can equality be made of this? It is irreconcilable.

The third problem with grants of economic privilege is that the act to divide, distract, frustrate, and exasperate our citizens. Invariably this leads to inequality, resentment, hostility, none of which is in the general welfare. Is it then surprising that we get the “occupy” movements, and the home grown terrorist with mass killings? Fixated with creation and sale of economic favors, our politicos have entirely forgotten the notion of civility and civics. The activities of our politicos, creating economic privileges are directly opposed to the civility our society needs to be functional. All men were create equal, and it is not for politicians to create aristocracies of politics, education, and wealth by granting privileges.

wehalt I am completely new to this process. I am a retired litigation attorney wishing to clean up politics, and think I have the answers and the procedures necessary to do so. Would like to be "adopted" and guided. can be reached at Guidetopolitics (talk) 00:26, 12 September 2012 (UTC) jc@jhcjd.com. Feel free to contact me at that address. John H. Correll JD

For you

Do not come to this user while wearing a tinfoil hat.

Thank you, I think. :)--Wehwalt (talk) 18:13, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Somewhere the image disappeared, but there are more... Montanabw^(talk) 20:51, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

NFLPA

I appreciate your review and feedback at NFLPA. Hopefully I can take care of those issues you mentioned on the talk page and get the ball rolling on that soon. I had a question about a sentence you changed, because it is quite confusing: "Both sides compromised and on John Mackey of the Baltimore Colts, before the merger an NFL team, but being grouped with the former AFL teams in the American Football Conference as president on the condition that former AFL player Alan Miller would become general counsel."

Sorry about that, I hope it fixed that.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

The games must go on

Good to see this on the Main page! - Wagner music in my ears, Tristan yesterday, you would have liked it, Tristan singer Andreas Schager will be known some day, I am sure, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

No doubt! So far very quiet. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

"Leise" was also a topic in the Tristan review, Kammerspiel und Sinnenrausch. It was not all quiet for Monteverdi's lost operas TFA, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:44, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Enjoy precious president's day, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Barber

I see that you're starting work on the Barber coinage article - would there possibly be any better images of Barber himself (or his father William, all there is is [8]...] in your sources? The grainy one we currently have seems to be the only one floating around online. Also, out of curiosity, are you planning to do his article in the near future? – Connormah (talk) 23:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I was just looking for an image of Charles Barber with a defensible copyright, but haven't found one yet. I would like to do his article, but have few sources on him. Not enough to make a decent-length FA. So not in the near future. When I get back to the ANA library in Colorado Springs, he's on my list of things to research, but it won't be this year.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I just looked through the LOC and archive.org, nothing. I would do some work, but I'm pretty busy and have just been limited to vandal fighting and gnoming recently, but ideally I'd like to help that Refimprove tag disappear, but I'll hold on until you can get the sources. Not sure, maybe NARA can help? Surely there must have been portrait photographs of him (and his father, William). – Connormah (talk) 00:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

NARA's the possibility, in my view. I've seen Charles in one mint picture, here, but obviously that's awful quality. The problem is, a lot of the Mint's records are in Philadelphia, at the NARA branch there. A bit of a schlep.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Any chance you could track where the preexisting one is from? From the looks of it it looks to be from a group photo, maybe if we get the year of it we can try to verify the copyright? – Connormah (talk) 01:27, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The image page says it is from the US Mint website. I see no image of Barber on the US Mint website, at least nothing likely comes up in a search. I will keep looking. I've seen other images of him in The Numismatist, but with unilluminating copyright descriptions.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

NARA I think will send you any related images of him in electrostatic photocopies with the citation info if you email the stillpix division IIRC, so that may be an option. I think then you'd have to either go there and scan them or buy prints if they have any. Surely there must be some portrait shots, I find it hard to imagine that there wouldn't be any... – Connormah (talk) 03:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

This looks to be the group image that the preexisting was cropped from, BTW. Is the copyright ok? – Connormah (talk) 04:00, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I've seen that picture ... there needs to be evidence of pre-1923 publication; at present I don't see any. Possibly I can find something online, it could be in the Mint Director's Report or Treasury Secretary Report for 1910. I think it's in one of Roger Burdette's books too (published 2006-2008). I'm in touch with the Smithsonian on coin images, I will ask them if they know anything once I get their agreement to let me photograph some coins :)--Wehwalt (talk) 20:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe they may have a commemorative medal bearing Barber's image, like the one of William I linked above? And good job if you can get them to let you photograph their coins - I've had some horror stories with using photos from local archives... – Connormah (talk) 02:25, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't know of a Barber medal produced by the government, but I don't have too many references on Mint medals, excepting assay medals, where I'm OK. There may have been one, produced relatively privately, either after his confirmation as Engraver or after his death. The Mint in those days seemed to go into that sort of thing. However, I did find your image in one of my books, where it is credited to "Denver Mint, U.S. Mint". There would have been no reason for the Mint engraving staff to travel to Denver so I think that part of it is wrong or at least imprecise, but I'm willing to take that as from the Federal Government. I think we can use those images after all.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:42, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Question

I asked for a peer review of the english language, two days later(today) somebody made another one and got a review, while mine didn't. I don't think that's fair!--Lucky102 (talk) 20:19, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I mean I put an article for peer review, and today, someone else, put up the exact same article, one I asked to review it, actually.--Lucky102 (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

It is usual for only people who took a large part in writing the article to list it for Peer Review. It's done because you have something in mind for the article, usually FA or GA.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:31, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

So did I.--Lucky102 (talk) 20:31, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but are you a principal writer of the article?--Wehwalt (talk) 20:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

No.--Lucky102 (talk) 20:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Then you should avoid nominating it for PR. There is a strong custom to let the principal authors of the articles, at least the recent ones, decide that sort of thing. The same goes for nominating for FA. At one time, anyone could do it for any article. However, these days, it is extremely rare for someone who has not been a major part of the article writing to make those decisions.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Avery Brundage

This is a note to let the main editors of Avery Brundage know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on September 6, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 6, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Avery Brundage (1887–1975) was the fifth president of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), serving from 1952 to 1972. Brundage attended the University of Illinois to study engineering and became a track star. In 1912, he competed in the Summer Olympics, contesting the pentathlon and decathlon; both events were won by Jim Thorpe. Following his retirement from athletics, Brundage became a sports administrator, rising rapidly through the ranks in United States sports groups. As leader of America's Olympic organizations, he fought zealously against a boycott of the 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin, Nazi Germany. Although Brundage was successful in getting a team to the Games, its participation was controversial, and has remained so. Brundage was elected to the IOC that year, and quickly became a major figure in the Olympic movement. Elected IOC president in 1952, Brundage fought strongly for amateurism and against commercialization of the Olympic Games. His final Olympics as president, at Munich in 1972, was marked by controversy: at the memorial service following the murder of 11 Israeli athletes by terrorists, Brundage decried the politicization of sports, and refused to cancel the remainder of the Olympics, declaring "the Games must go on". (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:03, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I see this as rather funny.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: William McKinley

This is a note to let the main editors of William McKinley know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on September 14, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 14, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

William McKinley (1843–1901) was the 25th President of the United States, serving from March 4, 1897, until his death. McKinley led the nation to victory in the Spanish–American War, raised protective tariffs to promote American industry, and maintained the nation on the gold standard in a rejection of inflationary proposals. McKinley's administration ended with his assassination in September 1901, but his presidency began a period of over a third of a century dominated by the Republican Party. McKinley served in the Civil War and rose from private to brevet major. After the war, he settled in Canton, Ohio, where he practiced law and married Ida Saxton. In 1876, he was elected to Congress, where he became the Republican Party's expert on the protective tariff, which he promised would bring prosperity. His highly controversial 1890 McKinley Tariff, together with a Democratic redistricting effort aimed at gerrymandering him out of office led to his defeat in the Democratic landslide of 1890. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Franklin Knight Lane

What do you think of this image? IMHO an FA should not have a blurry photo as the lead image. Otherwise if the hand in the crotch is your only objection, I can do a better crop of it from the Library of Congress original TIFF tonight.

• 

Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 16:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

That's fine. Thanks for your help.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:45, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Harry Truman

During the course of an almost entirely unrelated conversation, Mark Arsten (talk · contribs) mentioned that you and PumpkinSky (talk · contribs) are working on bringing Harry S. Truman up to FA. Quite by happy coincidence, I decided a few weeks ago to do a major rewrite on Truman's VP, Alben W. Barkley, with Kentucky and Kentuckians being my particular area of interest and all. The rewrite is currently under construction in my sandbox. Just thought I'd let you know in case you run across any good information about Barkley, and I'll try to do the same for you with Truman. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 20:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. If you look in United States Senate election in California, 1950, near the end, there is a mention and a link to a Time magazine article about him coming to California to campaign for Helen Douglas. I'll look for other stuff. Good luck on the rewrite, call on me for a review when it's ready for prime time.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer. I'll do that. Despite the fact that this will probably be a pretty long article when finished, I anticipate that I'll let it run the full GAC > PR > FAC gamut, so there will be plenty of places for you to review it. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 22:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

1. Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
2. Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
3. Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
4. You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).

If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).

• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
• Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
• Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:16, 19 September 2012 (UTC)