User talk:CPAScott/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, CPAScott/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Nlu (talk) 02:43, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Erie canal locks

I noticed you were creating pages for Erie Canal locks. Would it be possible to integrate the content on those pages into the Erie Canal page itself? It's a bit of a pain to have to click through all the pages to find out the relevant info. --Kchase02 (T) 00:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

A worthwhile suggestion if we expand the table under the locks section to include much of what is in the table on each lock page. I, however, didn't start to create the pages. The first 10 or so were already created. I simply cleaned up the tables (made them consistent) and added pages for the other locks so additional information can be added. I'm working on all of the canal pages in the NY State Canal System ... will revisit this issue later. Thanks.

I'll see what I can do to that table. Cheers and happy editing! --Kchase02 (T) 01:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I'm happy work with you on transferring the canal lock pages. My concern is what to do about the one's that have paragraphs of text in addition to the tables (I assume those are the older ones. Any ideas? --Kchase02 (T) 20:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, I did a rough draft of the table on a subpage in your userspace. Let me know what you think at the subpage and I'll paste the code right into the article once we're happy with the final copy. User:CPAScott/Erie locks. --Kchase02 (T) 22:41, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

KChase02: Good work on the table! I've revised it slightly to include both downstream and upstream elevations. AFAIK, the level of the canal changes only once other than by lock, between locks 33 and 34, not 34 and 35. Most of the information about the elevation and lift is coming from two sources -- the information signs on the locks themselves (see http://www.galenfrysinger.com/erie_canal_locks.htm). Note that, for example, the sign for 34/35 at Lockport shows the downstream elevation as 514.9 but the sign for lock 33 shows the upstream elevation as 512.9. As such, I believe the elevation change to occur there.

Beyond these sign photos, my other source is a .pdf file at http://www.eriecanal.org/images/misc/canal_profile.jpg. Here you will notice that if you start with the Troy-US lock on the eastern side of the canal (which takes the Hudson River at 1.4 feet and raises it 14' to 15.3 feet, the start of the Erie Canal, and add all of the lift elevations the math works out perfectly (thus I do not see a difference between any other locks). If you can confirm that the table data is wrong, though, please identify the source and modify it. Otherwise, I think the table you created is ready for publication.

As for the mileage that is unknown, I think we should just list it as "n/a" for now. If someone knows it, they can modify the table later.

Lastly, as for the individual lock pages, I suggest deleting them all. The ones that existed before have interesting picutres, but add little informational value.

I reinserted the name of the next lock in the last column. Though it's determinable from the table itself, it takes a minute, and the info doesn't take up much room. I replaced n/a for mileages with "data unavailable" which is more informative, imo. I added a sources section.

I'm not sure how to notate Locks 34 and 35. They seem to be at the same location. Do you know what's going on there?

As to the older subpages, I don't think we'll get a consensus at AfD to delete them outright. I'd suggest waiting to see if consensus emerges to merge them or keep them. I'll put a comment there to let them know what we're doing. --Kchase02 (T) 23:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I think we've done a good job, and I moved the table into the Erie Canal page. I think that will spur enough to officially "merge" the other pages and eliminate them.

The AfD was closed before I could post a comment, but here's the gist. To insert signature's automatically, type four tildes, like this ~~~~ or just click the signature button in the row of buttons hugging the top of the edit box (third from the right). Jazz up your signature here. Ah, also, merger information is here. I guess now we can work on merging the photographic and textual information into the Erie Canal article or a subarticle on the locks. I can take over if you've gotten bored with this or something. btw, I'm happy to help newcomers if you ever have a question or need help with something. Just leave a msg at my talk page. In the meantime, cheers and happy editing! --Kchase02 (T) 21:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

KChase, thanks for your help. AFA the pictures go, I can help with that but time is limited. I think the pics are nice, but there is no real encylopedic value to most of what's written. I really don't know what to do with them. It'd be good to work on other projects with you. Thx for your help. CPAScott 16:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Canal locks

Please don't create empty pages. The canal lock pages are being deleted because they contain nothing but an infobox. Please see WP:CSD article 1 regarding empty articles or those without any context. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 01:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Crikey, I see you've also made a bunch of similar articles for Erie Canal locks. Can you expand them all into articles asap? If not, I suggest amalgamating them into a list in a single article. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 01:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Chairboy: Thanks for pointing out the article. My intention was to standardize the way the canal pages look as the ones that existed were very mismatched with different tables, etc. Once I revised the standard table template, I added it to each new lock page so that it would be consistently used. I suppose the proper procedure is to wait until the page is created as an article and then, if it doesn't match the other pages, adjust it then. Is that correct?

Anyway, please wait to delete the Erie Canal pages until we can transfer all the data from the boxes into the master list on the Erie Canal page. I'll delete the pages for all locks without information once that is complete.

Thanks for the heads up. Relatively new here, but trying to add value to the encyclopedia!

• My opinion is to keep a separate article on each lock> Don't let the deletionists bully you into speedy deleting your own articles. In a perfect world, you might have written the articles on user subpages and then put them in main space when there was more meat to them, and this might still be a solution. If the final decision is to merge them into one article (because many have little content for now) you could do that; still create individual articles in your user space, then replace the merged article with the new separate articles when they are ready. (The merge decision, being made on the basis of very little content, wouldn't really apply at that point--although you would want to leave a note on each article's discussion page explaining what you did and why, to forestall additional deletion attempts. Thatcher131 16:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Automatic time/date stamp

per your question on the Erie Canal discussion, you can sign/date/time comments with 2 dashes and 4 tildes: --~~~~.--Isotope23 14:15, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hong Kong, China

Could you please explain why nothing was moved to the destination article when you turned "Hong Kong, China" into a redirect? [1] [2] Did you recognise the two articles serve very different purposes? — Instantnood 17:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[3] - Thank you very much. — Instantnood 20:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[4] - for your information. :-) — Instantnood 21:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Lperez2029

Thanks for the heads up. I have now tagged it with {{db-author}} which at WP:CSD they define as being authorized when an article's sole author removes all of an article's text. --Fuhghettaboutit 22:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Sonnenberg Mansion and Gardens

Your recent edit to Sonnenberg Mansion and Gardens (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 10:45, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Sonnenberg

I reverted because you carried out a copy and paste move, which, under the GDFL is not permitted, as it splits the article page histories. If you want to change the title of the article, please use the "move" feature of the Mediawiki software instead. Once you've done that, I can restore your improvements for you if you so wish. Cheers, — FireFox 11:12, 25 July '06

OK, so now I understand (which I didn't before -- thank you for explaining it). I will need to research the "move" feature of the Mediawiki software (which I am also not aware). Once I figure it out, I will request that you revert my changes to the new file. Regards CPAScott 11:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, you seem to have misunderstood. There is a tab at the top of every page saying "move". Use that. — FireFox 11:25, 25 July '06

Done. Cheers, — FireFox 13:41, 25 July '06

Disambig

Hold your horses-- I'm in the middle of this, and not good at it.SBHarris 19:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

LOL. That's OK, me either. I keep learning as I go! Best, CPAScott 19:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, it's sort of fixed. But "Charles Bassett" still goes to the astronaut. I really need a way to fix things so his page is renamed Charles Bassett (astronaut) or something, so that this doesn't happen. Then in the disambig page I can link it to Charles Bassett. The real problem is somebody noticed that the old west lawman linked to the astronaut, and simply delinked the lawman and created a bunch of redirects and links to go to the astronaut. With a reasonably common name shared by many people, that's crass. SBHarris 19:23, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I can help with that. Where is the page for Bassett the lawman? CPAScott 19:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Mich

I speedied the thing. Is that a bad idea? I can't imagine an entry for every German pronoun.User:Mikereichold | User_talk:Mikereichold 20:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I concur CPAScott 20:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Hi, CPAScott/Archive 1, thank you for applying for VandalProof. I am happy to announce that you are now authorized for use, so if you haven't already, simply download VandalProof from our main page and install it, and you're all set!

Warning to Vandals: This user is armed with VandalProof.

Please join the VandalProof user category by adding either: {{User:Vishwin60/Userbox/VandalProof}} (which will add this user box) or [[Category:Wikipedians using VandalProof]] to your user page.

If you have any queries, please feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page. Welcome to our team! - Glen 08:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

David L. Wagner

Hey, I noticed you put a speedy on my new article, David L. Wagner. This is unfounded, as he is the subject of a New York Times article published this very day (this is in the article). Please look more closely next time you label articles for speedy. Would you mind taking the tag off? JianLi 16:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Biographies may only be speedy deleted (not counting nonsense, vandalism, etc.) if they don't assert importance (this is the wording of CSD A7). This is because speedy deletion is generally for "patent nonsense" or "pure vandalism." However, if an article doesn't fit these criteria, and you still don't think an article is notable, then you can put the article up for deletion using WP:AFD. JianLi 16:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way, in response to your question, there is no official policy for "notability". At WP:Notability, it notes that there is not enough consensus for there to be a policy. Thus, in order to delete pages that assert importance, the page has to be assessed on a case-by-case basis at WP:AFD. JianLi 16:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the tag per your request. As far as academic biographies go, the following proposed Wikipedia guideline exists:

  If an academic/professor meets any one of the following conditions, they are definitely notable. If an academic/professor meets none of these conditions, they may still be notable, and the merits of an article on the academic/professor will depend largely on verifiability. 
  *The person is regarded as a significant expert in their area by independent sources. 
  *The person is regarded as an important figure by those in the same field. 
  *The person has published a large quantity of academic work (of at least reasonable quality). 
  *The person has published a significant or well-known academic work. 
  *The person is known for originating an important new concept, theory or idea. 
  *The person is known for being the advisor of an especially notable student. 
  *The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them.

I presume you would establish notability based on the first and/or second criteria, however neither is necessarily established in the article. Regardless, I suppose this discussion is academic for as you point out, no offical guideline is yet established to benchmark these articles against. Best. CPAScott 19:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

If we are to use those criteria, the article clearly passes by criteria 4, "the person has published a significant or well-known academic work." I refer to an important work of his in the second sentence, which is directly supported by a NYTimes article referenced by in-line citation. In any case, thank you for removing the speedy note. For future reference, only add speedy tags to clear-cut cases. For cases in which you have any doubts, use wp:prod or wp:afd. JianLi 20:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

JunJiDo

Since this article was deleted without my knowledge I wanted to put it back up. I have no content right now because the article was deleted. I am hoping someone who added content before helps out again.

Answers to Sonny diaz

Hi. Can you help me? While patrolling new pages, I came across what looked like a user page created in the mainspace. I moved the article. (See above). Did I do this correctly? If not, what is the best protocol to clean such articles? Thanks. CPAScott 04:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• If a new page is clearly intended to be a User Page, the method you used would work, but unfortunately leaves a Redirect. I also might be a little concerned with how to determine the intent of the author - maybe a quick question on their Talk page to determine what they were trying to do? Edits to someone else's User Page can be a touchy subject, so best to err on the side of caution. In the past, I have had the most success by simply tagging the page with the {{db-bio}} template. Hope my humble opinion is helpful, and keep up the great work! --Satori Son 17:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks, Satori Son, except one thing -- using {{db-bio}} tag is what I'm trying to get away from for articles that do nothing more than talk about the user. I come across this for new users (I've yet to see it for a user who already has an established user page). I'd use the vanity tags, but that doesn't necessarily guarantee that the offending article will be deleted or deleted in a timely manner. I do concede that the db-bio tag will work, but I also am aware there is probably a better option. It is this option I'm trying to master. Additional comments welcome. CPAScott 17:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• It looks like you've since figured out the proper procedure. Thanks. theProject 15:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome

I'd read a little bit in the welcome pages before and read about the four tildes but I hadn't clued in to what they were actually for. I guess it's not too bad for someone who editted their first Wiki page less than 48h ago ... :) Iainsona 04:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Is there a way to protect an archive?

Shouldn't there be a way for you to make your archive uneditable? I was coming here to ask you something else entirely but, having found your Talk page empty but for the link to the archive, I clicked on it and found all the edit links still available ... I guess you could be always reverting if people edit the archive but wouldn't that get annoying? It's a possibility that I'll be wanting to know in several months so it never hurts to ask in advance. Iainsona 15:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• Only admins have the power to protect or semi-protect a page. Even though such a talk archive is meant to be a permanent record, it is simply a sub-page for the user's talk page and thus can be edited by anyone at anytime. The best thing to do it to put a big formatted box message at the top indicating what the page is and asking others to please not edit it. Providing a prominent link back to the active talk page would probably help, too. Good luck. --Satori Son 16:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

LOL, Yes -- see? You asked a question on MY talk page and SOMEONE ELSE edited the page to answer your question! (Just kiddin' with ya, Satori Son). --CPAScott 16:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Apologies. I'm still getting used to the fact that someone else will actually look at my Talk page. You're, obviously, one of my mentors (inasmuch as you've edited some pages and responded to queries) in the steep learning curve that is Wikipedia (although I'm familiar with programming in basic raw HTML so it's not throwing me off too much). I'll ask any further questions I have on my OWN Talk page. :)
I came to your Talk page ORIGINALLY to ask you about the Muddy Brook/Maberly merge and whether you also meant Elliston. I ran out of time to ask that question here because of becoming intrigued by the question of protecting an archive and by the time that I came back to the puter, you'd already answered that question on the Discussion page at the Maberly page. I'm WATCHing and learning. :) Iainsona 01:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

No apologies. This is exactly where you should post a question. No one will answer a question posted on your talk page, 'cause we won't know it's there! I was kidding with Satori Son for answering your question on my talk page. Anywho ... --CPAScott 16:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Understood. Iainsona 17:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah, I was always the nerd on the front row with his hand up. Sorry for butting in, but I can never resist giving a completely unsolicited opinion. Anyways, here's the template I was referring to: {{talkarchive}}. Best of luck. --Satori Son 23:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

People shouldn't edit archives anyway. :) Tyrenius 22:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Lord Lyttelton

re List of Viscounts in the Peerage of the United Kingdom: As is shown by the linked page, Baron Lyttelton is an existing hereditary peerage created in 1794; so if Viscount Chandos gets a life peerage it must be as "Lyttelton of Somewhere". —Tamfang 03:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, couldn't tell ya. Know nothing of the subject matter ... just tryin' to fix broken links. --CPAScott 03:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

My mistake: didn't look closely enough, thought you had added it. —Tamfang 04:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

lol. Tyrenius 21:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The Wheat Field

Full marks for speed, but I thought I should point out that R.P.D. is building up a number of articles on Van Gogh and had just started this one. I guess it's his way of working. You might like to explain to him what happened if you've got time, or make a mental note for the future. Tyrenius 21:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Van Gogh paintings and groups of paintings

This is a project I recently started, when I saw that there is quite a number of works by Van Gogh in Wiki-Commons, yet not link to any page in Wikipedia. The idea is to get the Van Gogh biography on the main page straight and strong - or to have a separate page on the artist's career, with a summary on the main page and links to the individual pages on single paintings and groups of works.

So would you please remove the tag, and let me continue to work. I had 2 (two!) minutes indeed, while I was preparing the stub-tag and the cat's, to find the page merged. RPD 22:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Subst: templates

Hey, there. I did spend some time substing templates, the other day, mainly {{test1}} through 4, and {{welcome}}. The page on template substitution does offer some explanation, but as you requested, I won't just mention it and drop the issue. First, the difference between substitution and transclusion -- when a template is substituted, its contents are (more or less) copy-pasted onto the page in question, where when a template is transcluded, the full text of the template is called for and inserted each time the page is loaded. Subtle but important difference -- in the case of welcome messages, new users may get more benefit by being able to see, modify, and copy the markup language involved in the message; in the case of vandalism warnings, substing them reduces server load and makes sure that future changes to the template don't change the content of the warnings. Ultimately, it's not the biggest deal, either way, but occassionally people go through and subst a few templates. Hope that makes sense. :) Luna Santin 15:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you & explanation

Hi there, thank you for taking the time.

My expertise is not in wikipedia but rather in the subject I wrote about, so the wikipedia laws can be a little massed up in a lengthy article I make.

As per the word “our” you are right what happened was that I quoted there website. I have corrected it.

Bloger 19:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey Bloger, thanks for the note. I noticed you corrected the word our (although the grammatically correct word is "their" not "there". I think Non-NPOV still remains in the article, however. For example -- the first sentence describes the company as a "A world leader". That kind of statement is hard to prove. Items like " chosen by the U.S. government as its official tableware " certainly make the company notable, which is why the article is good to add. I've tagged it, and many of your other articles with the cleanup tag and someone will come around and clean them to better present soon. If you'd like some help with articles you write, you can always add the wikify or cleanup tags yourself ... they are {{subst:wikify}} and {{subst:cleanup}} . Simply add them to the top of your article to flag them as in need of review for copyediting or wikification. Best --CPAScott 19:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

SmartWare

Hi CPAScott. I hope this gets to you. I'm sorry I did something I shouldn't have done. I'm completely new to Wikipedia. Any help is appreciated. I'm still working on SmartWare and linking it to relevant places within Wikipedia. As you can see, SmartWare is mentioned, so providing an explanation and an article about the history seemed logical to me. Kind regards. Han. Han van Heerde 23:42, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Indrabhishek

I speedy kept it after author added some useful content. Hope you don't mind. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indrabhishek. utcursch | talk 07:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Funfail.com

You placed a {{db-bio}} tag on this page; I have removed it. {{db-bio}} (WP:CSD#A7) is only for a person or a group of people, not a website; also, in this case, there was an assertion of notability. Please use {{subst:prod}} in these cases in future, rather than {{db-bio}}. --ais523 14:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Scott.

I am a new user. I think I see you put a note for pass with flying colors. I created an request entry for it. Best regards. Stephenchao 14:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)StephenChao

Time-bin encoding

Hi,

I completed the entry for Time-bin encoding. If you agree, I'd remove the insufficient context banner. Thanks. UnHoly 16:22, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

• Done. I moved the first paragraph around a bit to get the subject in the first sentence per WP:MOS. Revise as you feel appropriate. --CPAScott 18:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

links to American

Please, when making a link with the word "American", don't link to the article American, it is a disambiguation page, and ideally should not have any links to it. Instead pick a better link, as in United States by writing out [[United States|American]]. Regards, -- Jeff3000 04:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Jeff -- good catch. Funny thing is, like you, I work on links to disambig. pages so I should of caught this myself. Anyway, thanks for fixing the links. Best --CPAScott 12:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Gideon Granger.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gideon Granger.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)