This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Latest comment: 9 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion
I think it's a bad idea to add county flags in {{Infobox settlement}}. They are redundant, obscure, and distracting. While there is a loophole in MOS:INFOBOXFLAG for national flags and state flags, the flags of California counties are not recognizable to most readers. As long as we're both editing southern California city infoboxes, it would be helpful if we could reach some consensus on this issue. Your colleague, —Stepheng3 (talk) 21:54, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
@Stepheng3: First thank you for the pleasant tone you struck in that message. Made a big difference in how I received it. I strongly disagree with your analysis. These flags are 23x15px. That is not some huge distraction. Now I will conceed that the flag of Los Angeles County is MUCH less recognizable that the Flag of the United States. IMHO it is more about alignment at that point. For example, take Anaheim, California. If you remove the Orange County flag then the three groups of text do not line up. Maybe its a little bit of my OCD kicking in but I like things to line up and look pretty! :-p Another thing to note is that featured articles such as New York City include the National and State flags. This was where I was drawing my guide from initially. Then (to my earlier point) I just liked it because it looks better IMHO.
I should also clarify, I am not really doing much with these city pages. My work on here is focused on fire departments. I am currently redoing most of the Fire departments in California pages. As I come across cities or counties that have United States or California missing in them, I have been updating them. I have also updated a few infoboxes that had super wide images in them, and other blaring issues. I don't want to step on your toes and certainly don't want to start any edit wars. Let me know your thoughts and let us definitely try to work together!
Again, thank you very much for the pleasant tone! Your cohort, --Zackmann08 (talk) 22:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
I get what you're saying about flags affecting the alignment of the text labels. And I do appreciate your efforts to shrink infoboxes that are too wide.
Frankly, the best way to deal with the alignment issue would be to remove the flag icons entirely. If readers want to see the state flag or county flag, they can always click through the appropriate wikilink.
I believe there are editors who go around removing all higher-order flag icons from infoboxes. In fact, I used to be one of them. But that was many years ago. I've developed a more relaxed attitude about flag icons. Nowadays I generally leave them alone except in extreme cases, such as when a county flag is displayed without the national flag. What I really want is consistency, but that seems too much to ask of Wikipedia.
There's a similar issue with the subdivision_type1 parameter. Some U.S. city infoboxes link to U.S. state and some link to Political divisions of the United States. In the context of California, I tend to prefer the former because it's more specific, but I see you've been pushing in the opposite direction. Do you see any clear advantage to Political divisions of the United States?—Stepheng3 (talk) 22:37, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
@Stepheng3: First of all, I COMPLETELY agree with you about U.S. state. The use of Political divisions of the United States was me copying and pasting from a poorly done page and not checking what I was copying. -_- Rather embarrassing actually. As for the flag icons I think we may just have to agree to disagree on that. I will hold off on doing much more editing of those. I've got enough stuff to do on my fire department pages... I will still jump in if I see a blatant mistake, (there are a few that just have "United States", note even United States let alone United States). Don't hesitate to ping me if I can help with anything you are working on. --Zackmann08 (talk) 22:47, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Well that's a relief; I was worried I might've overlooked something. And I'm okay agreeing to disagree about county flag icons.
There are thousands of California populated places with Wikipedia articles, so there's always plenty I could use help with. Lots of parameters to be filled in, sources to be cited, seldom-used parameters to be deleted, details to be standardized, images and facts to be added, mayors to be updated and so on. You can study my edit history for ideas, or if you tell me what you like doing, I can make specific suggestions. Warm regards,—Stepheng3 (talk) 22:58, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
PS: I should also mention that I have mixed feelings about replacing United States with United States. I do it occasionally myself, but I suspect some editors regard the United States as a major geographic feature for the purposes of WP:OLINK, so it's not safe to treat these as blatant mistakes.—Stepheng3 (talk) 23:50, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
@Stepheng3: That would be an example of a place where I feel that you just have to go with what is most common. I would venture to guess that something like 85-90% of infoboxes link United States. As you yourself said, consistency is key! If nothing else it is more practical to try to change 10-15% than 85-90%. Even if that number is more 75/25... You get my point. Anyway, back to work for me! Talk more soon I'm sure. --Zackmann08 (talk) 00:01, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Another point to consider: what about counties which don't have a flag, or for which no image of the flag has yet been uploaded? Butte County, California and Colusa County, California, for example. Would you create an icon using the county seal instead? Best regards,—Stepheng3 (talk) 22:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
@Stepheng3: Personally I would like to just create a flag for those counties! But I'll live to fight another day.... This is a valid point. No I would not use a county seal. But These are not as common though they certainly do exist! --Zackmann08 (talk) 22:57, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
FEMA Urban Search and Rescue Task Force
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Pipeing a space there causes the article to sort to the top of the list. This is generally done for a main article for that category. Besides the space, you will commonly see an '*' used to sort lists near the top. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
@Vegaswikian: Awesome! Thanks for the explanation! --Zackmann08 (talk) 21:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Removing listing of Fire Departments
I noticed that when you supposedly fixed the Los Angeles County Fire Department page I noticed that you removed the section about other fire departments in Los Angeles County. Why? I spend several hours trying to put that together. And don't come back saying unsourced material because that's just being childish! tom991
@Tom991: if you would like to try that again in an adult, civilized tone, without sarcasm such as "supposedly fixed" and accusing me of being childish, I would be more than happy to have a constructive conversation regarding my changes. --Zackmann08 (talk)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Virginia/color
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for your message yesterday. Have been doing a little Article Rescue Squadron type stuff recently so more fire-fighting than a particular interest in fire departments. Having said that, my personal view is that they're like secondary/high schools and railway/railroad stations; inherently notable (and interesting), even the smallest.
Keep up the good work. -Arb. (talk) 20:13, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
@Arb: Heyo! I like your point about them being inherently notable. I agree! That being said, I have my reservations about some of these poorly done articles. Let me revisit the article you mentioned above and see if I can't restore some stuff. The issue for me is I don't like blatantly copied material or stuff that is super verbose. For example this. Yes it removes a lot from the page but holy cow... That stuff is NOT needed. Anyway, gotta find that middle ground. Thanks for the comments and keep up the good work!! --Zackmann08 (talk) 21:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: My apologies. Regarding the {{Infobox fire department}}, my confusion is that the template already has Water tenders and you added tankers which doesn't link to anything. My understanding is that these are the same thing? Perhaps you can help me understand, what do you mean by a tanker? Are these perhaps one and the same? --Zackmann08 (talk) 15:47, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Talkback
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I simply removed certain trucks that were no longer at the stations. I have been to most all of the Clark County Fire Department stations while on vacation there last month, and after I asked, they said that those trucks weren't there. FireTruckBuff8298 (talk) 01:32, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
@FireTruckBuff8298: your edits did not reflect this fact. You simply removed the content without citing anything or giving any explanation. From now on, if and when you are removing content, include an explanation in the edit summary. Otherwise it just looks like vandalism. I appreciate your efforts. Also, on a personal note, I'm SUPER jealous you got to visit all these stations! Get any good pictures? --Zackmann08 (talk) 03:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, check out my YouTube page. FireTruckBuff8298 (ssbannerboy) FireTruckBuff8298 (talk) 02:47, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
March 2015 edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Oh Zack please do get a life! Unless you are a Wikipedia administrator you can't tell me that I am going to be blocked in the future. And it seems that you have been warned a few times your self. This is the problem with Wikipedia, too many people think that they have power when they really don't! Thank You, Tom991
@Tom991: I was using the well established WP:WARN mechanism that has long been setup. Not claiming to have power I do not. I would encourage you to read WP:GOODFAITH. There is no need to personally attack me and tell me to get a life. This is the second time you have left this sort of comment on my talk page. I would appreciate you no longer doing so. Thank you and have a good day. --Zackmann08 (talk) 22:10, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I understand that the article may not meet Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines however per the proposed deletion policy, if a proposed deletion tag is removed, a new method of deletion must be pursued. AfD would be the next step here should you wish to pursue this. Rjd0060 (talk) 13:52, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
@Rjd0060: Gotcha. Thanks! I appreciate the explanation. I thought that because the original proposal had not given any reason, that reopening it with a reason would be the way to go. --Zackmann08 (talk) 16:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Nuclear Firefighters
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hey,
Thanks for reaching out to me. Just want to say I don't want to take any credit for being a firefighter. I was only a firefighter at a nuclear power plant and in the several years I stood watch, I never had to respond to a large fire. So I feel it inappropriate for me to accept any gratitude, would be an insult to true firefighters that stand watch for cities and counties.
Having to participate in drills, constant training, and live burns, I must say that I now have a small understanding of the risk city firefighters accept into their daily life. Fighting a controlled gas fire is scary! Couldn't imagine an uncontrolled fire. I learned to worship the charged nozzle, would never stray from it when entering a building and fighting a fire.
I am now an engineer and no longer support the fire brigade at the nuclear power plant. I miss working with my team, a great bunch of people that just understand things better than others that have never been in the trenches.
My idea I would like to propose is to ask around about firefighters that have experience with training at nuclear power plants.
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have removed a recent PROD of yours. You will have to take Croydon Fire Company to WP:AFD because Arb contested your original PROD, which makes it a "controversial" proposal. Whether or not it is in fact controversial is a different matter and not one upon which I have an opinion. The discussion here may or may not be of relevance in this case. - Sitush (talk) 07:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi - thanks for the message, and I'm happy to help! It's pretty simple, really. We'd be locking the barn door after the horses got out and came back by themselves. I'll point you to WP:SPARE because this is a perfect example of a page that can attract an immature crowd.
This article attracts about ten editors a month. Four editors have made changes in the past ten days (not counting the reverts), and three of those were test edits. They're clearly unrelated to each other, and the frequency is so low that briefly protecting the page from every editor who isn't auto-confirmed wouldn't stop any ongoing issue. That might change, but right now everything seems fine.
On my user page, there are links to my admin logs, including the log of pages I've protected. Take a look at the page histories of those articles. You'll see (I hope) that when I lock a page against anyone, it's because there's a current problem that we can't address another way, by blocking the problematic editor or sending the issue to dispute resolution or ANI or AN3.
This is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, and that's very important to us. That's why we don't protect the TFA, though we do protect the POTD. (I think I declined an RFPP request for the TFA yesterday or the day before.) Sure, we could lock the TFA and save us all a lot of trouble every day, but I'd much rather block one or two problematic editors than lock any page from millions of potential new Wikipedians. And believe me - I got the mop when Grawp was doing his worst, so I have no problem giving the big hammer when I have to.
In the end, it comes down to experience. (Reading WP:LAME every once in a while for perspective helps too.) The way you learn is to ask questions. Thanks for doing that. If I can help in any way or you have more questions, just shout. :-) KrakatoaKatie 09:52, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
@KrakatoaKatie: Thank you SO MUCH for that awesome explination. That was EXACTLY what I needed and completely helped me understand! I really appreciate it! --Zackmann08 (talk) 16:09, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
County Departments
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I'm basically neutral about that group of categories. The problem is that once someone creates it, then it should only be emptied at a WP:CFD discussion. Since that category has existed for 2 years, clearly a discussion is warranted before it is emptied. If you decide to nominate it, the correct nomination would be an upmerge to the Virginia category. Have fun. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:04, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Swiftwater rescue
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Just FYI: no one in the industry says "swift water rescue" -- it is always "swiftwater rescue." It derives from the word "whitewater" which is one word. LaurentianShield (talk) 03:00, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
re: CALSTAR
Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Sure - I'll move that for you sometime this week. Once it's done, the page histories will be merged. Used to do these in my sleep but I haven't done one in a while so I need to read the instructions again. Not too many things around here that can't be fixed if you mess up, but this is one of them. :-) KrakatoaKatie 08:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
...and done. I didn't fix any redirects, so go back and make sure that any redirects to Calstar now go to the correct destination. I'll be traveling until Mother's Day so I'd appreciate it if you could watch my talk page. I haven't been active again very long so there shouldn't be much to do, but sometimes people put things there that need quick attention from an admin (and things that really don't). Thanks. (And Lincecum's problem is that he keeps cutting his hair. It's all in the hair. Well, that and decreased velocity on his fastball. ;-)) KrakatoaKatie 19:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
@KrakatoaKatie: you rock! Thanks a bunch. By the way... I love your signature... Might have to steal that. ;-) --Zackmann08 (talk) 20:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Talkback
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hello, Zackmann08. You have new messages at Fdizile's talk page. Message added 00:25, 30 April 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Your bot seemed to misidentify me as a member of the "Firefighter's Category"
Just wanted to let you know!
If you need help, just shoot me a message or email, I'd be happy to help! Fdizile (developer) 00:25, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
PROD
Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi! I removed your PROD at the Northern Mariana Islands PD for these reasons:
1. No rationale was given
2. An agency/department of a territorial government is equivalent to a U.S. department of public safety/state police and therefore is automatically notable
@WhisperToMe: Thanks for letting me know. I agree with you on the first one, that was my mistake, however I must contradict you on the second one. There are dozens of fire department pages for cities all across the U.S. that have been deleted for not being notable. Just because it is a public organization does not make it notable. Thanks! --Zackmann08 (talk) 02:35, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
If it's a "local government" public organization (city or county level) then sources are demanded. If it's U.S. state level or equivalent province level it's automatically assumed to be notable (as long as existence is easily verified). If I start a stub about a ministry of some country or a department of a U.S. state, I have an expectation that the Wikipedia community will know it's notable. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:47, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Florence Fire/EMs
Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Florence Fire/EMS Department. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.
If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Please review WP:UNSOURCED and WP:NOTASTATSBOOK before you simply revert appropriate edits. Mr305worldwide 20:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mr305worldwide: for future reference, if you wish to place a warning on a users page (whether mine or someone else's), please make use of WP:TWINKLE. Simply copying and pasting a message I left you just looks terrible. There is no formatting, your signature is not properly time stamped (since you just replaced my username with your own) and none of those links work. I mean the purpose of the warning is to help address the issue and since none of the message links anywhere I have nowhere to go to try to resolve the issue. --Zackmann08 (talk) 21:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mr305worldwide: you continue to operate under the assumption that I am at war with you. If that is the mentality you wish to have then that is your right. My only desire was to have proper information on the page. The material you added to the page was not properly cited and you removed content that was cited. When you didn't get your way, you threw a temper-tantrum and blanked the page and even vandalized my constructive response to the attempt by a neutral 3rd party to protect the page, only stopping after multiple admins warned you. As far as I am concerned there never was a "war". I bare no ill will towards you, I simply don't care. Do as you wish, but vandalize the page again and I will simply revert your changes again, so I would advise you to find better ways to contribute to the Wikipedia community. Have a good evening. --Zackmann08 (talk) 00:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Only warn if you revert, please follow levels
Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Diff
Two things, first follow the warning levels scheme, if it is an editor's first edit, it is extremly uncalled for to jump on with a 4im warning, that isn't WP:AGF. Second, I reverted and warned that user, there is no purpose in you trying to warn them again. Let the reverting editor give the warning, unless they have obviously forgotten. Thanks! EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 03:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
I see you have already noticed it, my bad. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 03:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
@EoRdE6: My bad *hangs head*. I Can't stand vandals... Its one thing if it is accidental or something, but when obviously vandalize.... It just pisses me off. :-p But you are of course correct, that is not WP:AGF. Thanks for the message. I shall do better. --Zackmann08 (talk) 03:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Florence Fire/EMs
Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Florence Fire/EMS Department. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.
If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Please review WP:UNSOURCED and WP:NOTASTATSBOOK before you simply revert appropriate edits. Mr305worldwide 20:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mr305worldwide: for future reference, if you wish to place a warning on a users page (whether mine or someone else's), please make use of WP:TWINKLE. Simply copying and pasting a message I left you just looks terrible. There is no formatting, your signature is not properly time stamped (since you just replaced my username with your own) and none of those links work. I mean the purpose of the warning is to help address the issue and since none of the message links anywhere I have nowhere to go to try to resolve the issue. --Zackmann08 (talk) 21:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mr305worldwide: you continue to operate under the assumption that I am at war with you. If that is the mentality you wish to have then that is your right. My only desire was to have proper information on the page. The material you added to the page was not properly cited and you removed content that was cited. When you didn't get your way, you threw a temper-tantrum and blanked the page and even vandalized my constructive response to the attempt by a neutral 3rd party to protect the page, only stopping after multiple admins warned you. As far as I am concerned there never was a "war". I bare no ill will towards you, I simply don't care. Do as you wish, but vandalize the page again and I will simply revert your changes again, so I would advise you to find better ways to contribute to the Wikipedia community. Have a good evening. --Zackmann08 (talk) 00:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
June 2015
Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
@John from Idegon: I get you already don't like me but that was NOT edit warring. Again this is a user with 4 edits who chose to revert my edit which clearly violates 3 separate Wikipedia policies. Again I am in the process of trying to redo all fire pages. Be honest, you simply reverted my edit because you don't like me not because you think the content belongs. --Zackmann08 (talk) 05:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
@John from Idegon: also, don't template the regulars. Come on man! You've been around here for years you should know this! If you think I am engaging in an edit war you don't need to put a big giant warning on my page. Just say something. --Zackmann08 (talk) 06:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I reverted your edit because you are EDIT WARRING. That's why I templated you for EDIT WARRING. A few days ago, you boldly reverted a bunch of content from an article. That's just fine. Earlier today, an editor reverted your bold edit. Still fine. At that point, you should have gone to the talk page and started a discussion to form a consensus. Or retired from the fray. Those are your only two proper options at that point. Instead, you chose to remove the content again. THAT is what edit warring is. It is not my opinion, it is a fact.
As far as not templating the regulars, when you get to be one, hollar. If you were a regular, you'd know that most IP addresses are dynamic and change regularly. The fact that the IP only has a few edits is meaningless. If you were a regular, you'd know the difference between policies, guidelines and essays. If you were a regular, you'd know the difference between a PROD, a CSD and an XFD process. If you were a regular, you'd know that it is POLICY to assume good faith and wouldn't accuse me of acting in bad faith (for the second time now). I don't give a flying fuck about you, or the DFD. My only concern is the encyclopedia. You seriously need to get over yourself. John from Idegon (talk) 06:47, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
@John from Idegon: Well glad you got to blow off some steam but shouting obscenities at me does nothing to help the situation. Have a good day and kindly don't bother me anymore. --Zackmann08 (talk) 07:46, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
No one shouted obscenities. Quit misrepresenting things. I won't be writing here again until I have to template you again, which with your IDHT attitude, will be inevitable. You are the one that keeps taking things personally. I simply used an expletive to emphasize that it isn't personal with me, something you accused me of. Do yourself a favor and stop taking things personally and listen. Whether you like the way I express it or not, I am trying to help you. John from Idegon (talk) 08:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
United States or 
California missing in them, I have been updating them. I have also updated a few infoboxes that had super wide images in them, and other blaring issues. I don't want to step on your toes and certainly don't want to start any edit wars. Let me know your thoughts and let us definitely try to work together!
Template:Virginia/color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 23:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
--Zackmann08 (talk) 21:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
