User talk:Gmcbjames/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

A page you started (Woolland Brothers) has been reviewed!

Thanks for the advice however the information on the BHO website is from different sources - I just didnt have the time to go through and put the sources listed on the wiki pageDavidstewartharvey (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Davidstewartharvey, you may wish to state the above on the talk page of Woolland Brothers, though not necessary or required, the statement on the talk page will alert editors the source used has additional sources for verification of notability. Editors tend not to actually visit the reference rather tend to tag the article as having only one source. Just a suggestion, I enjoyed the article and have added an external link with some great images of the former turn of the 20th century department store. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice and adding the pictureDavidstewartharvey (talk) 07:52, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Waterford & Wedgwood

Thanks for the correction. Apologies for the error. Cloudbound (talk) 20:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

No apologies necessary Cloudbound, thank you for being on top of the WWRD sale, your edits were greatly appreciated. We'll see if the sale goes through and clears the regulatory process in the coming months. I have no idea of what impact this will have on the WWRD portfolio of companies & brands. A Wedgwood brand of scissors? - just joking...I hope. I would not have seen this turn of events without your heads-up. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 22:43, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Cloudbound, on 2 July 2015, Fiskars Corporation completed the sale, I have updated the appropriate pages to reflect the change of ownership of WWRD. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 01:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Cloudbound (talk) 19:11, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Article Lincoln, Nebraska

Until later and you know where to find me ^_^ - I'll be back a bit later ^_~ heh~..... Hanyou23 (talk) 05:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hanyou23, have fun amid the real world work - I will look forward to hearing from you and seeing your images once again in a month or so! Thank you for making wikipedia fun for me - Knights in White Satin - those were the days and it is a miracle I can remember them! Until later....Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 06:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Decorated Warror

	Warrior of Middle-Earth Gold Shield
	So awarded to Gmcbjames, for helping take the Lincoln (Nebraska) article to where it has never been. Three Cheers!!! Hanyou23 (talk) 20:18, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

History of ceramic art

I noticed you moved Ceramic Art to History of ceramic art. I am curious as to why the redirect from the move instead points to Pottery. And also, Pottery seems to be mostly history as well - so shouldn't it be also renamed History of pottery? Just curious - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 00:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

The closest thing we have to ceramics is pottery. The pottery article is of greater scope than the topic's history, and therefore it wouldn't be subject to renaming to "History of pottery" — though it is ripe for splitting the history material off to that title per WP:SPLIT. Thanks for asking. The Transhumanist 01:28, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Doing some merging of the history sections would be a good idea. Johnbod (talk) 15:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Johnbod, I have opened a discussion on the History of ceramic art talk page regarding the move and renaming. I agree, the best redirect for Ceramic art was a redirect to History of ceramic art in order to preserve linked articles in the context of meaning within the articles. The articles Ceramic art and Pottery have always been sticky over the years and this may be a good time to clean-up and reorganize both articles. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:31, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! I opened a discussion here to try to get an NPOV resolution. So add your arguments --Cs california (talk) 06:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Reverting of my edits

Hello

I noticed that you have reverted some of my edits:

• On the Maw & Co article you put back Category:Art pottery and Category:Ceramic art which I had removed. It is virtually an anomaly in Category:Ceramic art (but less so in Category:Art pottery). My question would be: why include this particular manufacturer in those categories and not any of the many other ceramics manufacturers?
• It seems odd that you have redirected Ceramics to Ceramic art instead of Ceramic. Also, the ceramic article could do with more information on ceramic art rather than merely having a link in the See also section.
• On List of Bunnykins figurines both of the methods that you use are inconsistent with most of the rest of Wikipedia.
• On Clay pit I removed a number of things that were superfluous, including a red link in the See also section, which another edit has once again removed.
• I am particular interested in the wholesale reversion that you did of my edits to the Kaolinite article. I removed a spammish external link and a completely irrelevant external link, I tagged a dead link, I removed a sentence that contributed the the systemic bias on Wikipedia, I reorganised the See also links, and I removed some irrelevant and unneeded links.

Regards. 203.109.161.2 (talk) 09:19, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello,

First I would encourage you to get a username & set up a user page so you aren't confused with other IP users. Also this would enable editors to communicate clearly with you in regard to your edits and concerns. That said, let me address your specific concerns on edits I have reverted:

• On the Maw & Co article, your first edit removed the categories Category:History of ceramics and Category:Decorative arts with the edition of Reflist|30em with the second edit removing Category:Art pottery and Category:Ceramic art. There was no need to remove the categories as the article - as read - includes all of these topics and are appropriately categorized. If these are appropriate categories for other manufacturers, then they should be added to those articles. Many manufacturers - and specific to Maw & Co. - as stated in the lede - began as "art potteries."

• In the article List of Bunnykins figurines, the "References" are general references WP:GENREF used for the article, while "Citations" are direct cites from sources. There is no set style of reference sections and each article is unique in its style. A "Further reading" section implies differently than references which were used to write the article. See WP:FNNR. I prefer to use general references to avoid citation clutter.

Note: I changed the section to References, added subsections Citations and Sources, even though I may have reverted your edits, I have taken your edits in consideration. Gmcbjames (talk) 06:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Thought I would address your concerns regarding consistency with the rest of Wikipedia. All articles are independent of each other, there is no set style in regards to section heading names or format in the MOS. Consistency is in each article and to change style an editor must obtain consensus on the talk page. Style must be in the same format as what was used to create the article - i.e. American English/Month, Day, Year/Miles - for example - so the article remains consistent. So my advise is to always evaluate the article as written (American English/British English/Other English (many)), check for templates at the beginning of the article (say for instance use Month/Day/Year or Day/Month/Year) and don't sweat the small stuff. Gmcbjames (talk) 06:25, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• On Clay pit, the red-link was alright to remove, however this is not why I reverted the edit - and another editor removed the red-link after my revert of your edit so this has been taken care of though I don't think it was necessary myself. I reverted your edit as categories and the project specific stub tags were removed. This stub article needs expansion and the stub tags need to remain in place until the article is expanded. Again, the categories were appropriate and did not need to be removed.

• On Kaolinite, we may have to disagree, as I found the edits - while some minor edits within your edits were fine - to not be constructive on the whole. My suggestion would be to add information rather than blanking/deleting information -- if you wish to remove a spammish external link to do so with one edit with an explanation in the summary as to why - rather than to make multiple ad hoc deletions of text with a misleading edit summary.

• Do see the talk page for the Ceramics redirect here as this may answer your question.

On the whole, your contributions are constructive, my concern in the articles where I reverted your edits is the deletion of information with misleading edit summaries while using an IP address which has a record of only a couple of days. You seem to have a good understanding editing and I wonder how this came about in just a couple of days or maybe you may have forgotten to log-in to your account? Anyway, feel free to make edits - maybe go slower and rather than deleting information - add information finishing off with accurate edit summaries? And do set up a username - I do think you can make the encyclopedia better and would like you to become part of the "community." Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:24, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

My suggestion for clearer edit summaries is to state what edits were made such as "removed redlink." Or when removing text or categories etc. stating in the edit summary exactly which categories were removed or text was removed. You then can explain why you removed the information briefly or if you have made a major edit, just state it on the article's talk page. These are just suggestions - nobody is perfect at edit summaries. Also this makes it easier for an editor to find "missing" information in the edit summaries when looking at the article history - and to avoid adding something already removed. Gmcbjames (talk) 21:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

I reviewed your edits on Kaolinite, I agree the external link François Xavier d'Entrecolle [1] was unnecessary and have removed it. Your deletion in the lede: "Alternating layers are sometimes found, as at Providence Canyon State Park in Georgia, United States" as stated to be wp:CSB was not necessary. Instead of deleting where alternating layers can be found, to combat bias and to maintain neutrality, an option would be to add information - another instance where alternating layers can be found. Although tagging dead links is ok, frankly I have found the tag just rots as no one will fix it - so my suggestion would be to try first to fix the link, if it cannot be fixed or a new citation added, then go ahead and remove the dead link.

I hope I have addressed your concerns regarding reverting some of your edits. If you have any further questions, do let me know and I will try my best to answer. If you need assistance and am a new editor, feel free to ask me questions. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 01:48, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Third opinion

Response to third opinion request:

Frankly, I'm surprised a third opinion was brought up from the IP about this considering a single question being posed does not exactly constitute a thorough discussion, but at any rate, while I do believe the IP's edits were made in good faith, I agree with Gmcbjames' reasoning for reverting them. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 00:46, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Copyright issue - false positive

Could you do a quick re-write of this edit [2] on both The arts and Ceramic art (where it originally came from). You seem qualified to paraphrase. I am requesting help, not making an acquisition. It looks like a copyright violation from [3]. Thanks.Lucas559 (talk) 20:14, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Lucas559, thank you for the heads up. Although I didn't write the lede in question for Ceramic art and only used it for The arts, I went ahead and rewrote the lead in Ceramic arts and fixed the summary in The arts. Good work - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 23:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Lucas559, this may have been a false postive - the article Ceramic art was moved to History of ceramic art in the last month, the lede for Ceramic art was the text from the former article. The history of History of ceramic art goes back to 2006 and many of the possible copyvios seem to be copies of the text from the WP article rather than the other way around - something a bot would not pick up. Oh well, a rewrite never hurts anything! Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 00:45, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Lucas559, this was a false positive, use of the possible text match was used on WP prior to the dates used on the possible match sites. I checked the edit history for History of ceramic art. The bot does not recognize when a page has been split, merged, or a summary article section which inclues the introduction from the main article - even though the edit summary clearly indicates the copy or merge in the edit summary with the article from where the text originated wiki-linked to preserve copy-write. This has been discussed on the bot's talk page and no solution has been applied. I edited the bot page to reflect the FP for Ceramic Art and The Arts. It took awhile to research, however I wished to rule out any copy-write issues from the work of other editors. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 04:53, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. Maybe you can help us patrol the wikiprojects you are interested in?Lucas559 (talk) 20:14, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Ceramic arts

Hi, I'm sorry you've been having a hard time given all the work you've put in to this article; you're neither to blame for EranBot's suspicions, nor for the relatively uncited state of the merged materials (nor even for the historic state of the article itself). As it stands, it reads like a very well-informed article by someone who knows their topic: only, it isn't at all clear where many of the claims actually come from.

It seems quite clear to me, for reasons I've spelt out in so many words on the talk page, that the refimprove tag is more than justified given the state of the material. I've made a start on fixing the problem, never having been keen on drive-by taggers; and I've used just one tag where others might indeed have given a royal sprinkling. Unfortunately I'll be away for a while now, but I'm sure you and the other experts on the topic will be able to beef up the references.

I do hope this is all right with you; the tag is in no way a reflection of your efforts, which have certainly improved the article. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:06, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Chiswick Chap, I understand it wasn't a drive by tagging and you are sincere in your criticism. EranBot cannot, as a bot, know the article's history - as it cannot read the talk pages nor the edit summaries - which are quite clear in the evolution of the article Ceramic arts, the move to History of ceramic art and the merge back into Ceramic arts. However this is all well documented as to the where, whys and hows. Now it is just a pain. Since this is a summary article, most sections have main articles - and yes although verifiability isn't inherited, my opinion is if there is less than a 50% chance of a statement being challenged WP:LIKELY then there is no need to cite. I am also hesitant to add a cite to a paragraph to support all statements within the paragraph. We may differ there. Thank you for adding citations and helping - there are few editors who are interested in helping by adding citations - in fact - I have seen few - if any editors - adding citations in the time I have been on WP! Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:32, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Chiswick Chap, the problem with citations for paragraphs is the cite is left even though other editors add, delete or change the text in the paragraph. Case in point is there is an article with a citation I researched since it was a published work, for almost eight years the citation was moved about and the final edit - now three years old is completely opposite what has been "cited." General cites for a paragraph rather than a disputed statement causes more harm to WP, than a specific cite for a disputed statement. I have been working to clean up these messes in article subject matters I am very familiar with the topic. I bring this up not to be argumentive, that is not my intention - rather to give you my perspective of why a clean-up tag without any specifics stated on the talk page or in communication to an editor are from my opinion not helpful. I will do what I can to clean-up the article, though just applying general cites to paragraphs is not something I prefer to do. So if there are any statements or information you think in Ceramic art needs to be verified, let me know and I will do the research to make sure the information has a citation. I have been cleaning up the article - I have written very little if any of the text - most of the History section was edited from 2001-2006 and summaries with main articles were created with the introductions of the main article by a senior editor (and creator when he moved the history to a new article which has been merged back) Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 21:47, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Malibu Tile

Contents of discussion

Hello, I believe you tagged an article I had chiefly written, entitled Malibu_tile, with: {{weasel|date=July 2015}} {{advert|date=July 2015}} {{peacock|date=July 2015}} Attempting to understand these rather broad assertions, I did follow the links and read the content. If the weasel tag refers to, "vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information," I have difficulty understanding how that applies to the article. Is it the vague part? The biased part? Or, the unverifiable part? I've tried to be specific and reference everything that seemed to need documentation. A previous editor did note that some of my descriptions were more emotional than factual--I am so enthusiastic about malibu tile that perhaps that comes across in my writing. On the advert issue, it is not an advertisement for anybody or any company, although Malibu Ceramic Works does play a prominent role. Once one understands that Bob Harris (founder of MCW) singularly revived this historic art form after it had been dormant for nearly 50 years, it is hard not to focus on his accomplishments. I am only a hobbyist in ceramic tile but Harris' body of work is unparalleled, in my opinion. And then the peacock reference (funny that there is a peacock in this article), my understanding is, "This article contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information." Yes, I acknowledge that it promotes the subject but does it not impart real information? If someone with no prior knowledge of malibu tile reads this article, they don't understand the history, the content or the process any better? I was a professor of Psychology for 17 years and published about a dozen research articles in refereed journals so I understand the importance of writing concisely and documenting opinions and other important references. Perhaps I am over-reacting to your challenge, however, it seems rather heavy handed to insert these exclamation points on top of the article. Wouldn't it be more constructive to place these following the sentences wherein they apply? It's rather difficult to know where to begin with such non-specific feedback. So, where do we go from here? I'd like to take down the exclamation points while you and I have some dialog about your concerns. Can we do that? Best, Dtopa (talk) 20:27, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Dtopa, hello and thank you for asking. The artile was "tagged" with issues needing to be addressed, and improvement tags are placed the top of the article. I agree tags are obnoxious. I used the least serious of tags which attract the least amount of attention. Actually the article has some serious problems which could lead to its being deleted through AfD.

First I am so glad you are working on an article about Malibu Tile, which is notable. The article has problems as the company Malibu Ceramics Works hasn't thus been shown as notable as required in the notability of companies. While Malibu Tile easily is notable because it is mentioned in secondary and third-party sources. The company MCW seems to be a rather local company with mention in local newspapers? While mentioning MCW is acceptable, giving undue weight to the company is not within policy for notability. If you wish I can give links to policy regarding this issue.

More weight needs to be given to Malibu Tile and the company Malibu Ceramics Works should be condensed down to a short section. I would say spin off Malibu Ceramic Works to its own article, however because of notability issues the article would be deleted. I think Malibu Ceramics Works is an interesting venture and can somehow be included in the artilc about Malibu Tile, however since MCW is only reproducing designs and techniques used by Malibu Tile without any other relationship, I am afraid down the road it will be deleted. Notability cannot be inherited.

As to the tags, you are an enthusiastic writer! Wikipedia as an encyclopedia is very dry - style is from WP:MOS. One cannot help writing favorably about what enjoys or likes, however to be encyclopedic, it has to be clear cut and dry for language. I could remove the "weasel" and "peacock" terms, which will address the issue of reading like an advertisement. Though I thought as a major contributor - creator? - you may wish to give it a go yourself. I am willing to help if you wish. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 22:04, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Very good. I can understand the advertising issue and I think I can reduce the footprint for Malibu Ceramic Works. I'd like the opportunity to clean that up and, at the same time, see if I can find any weasels or peacocks, both of which are pretty nasty animals. If it is OK with you, I will delete the two exclaimed warnings, leaving the advert in. I have a kind of action packed weekend but I will try to get to this at the first of next week. Thank you. Dtopa (talk) 00:38, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Give it a go Dtopa! I have added an under-construction tag - this will help, as most editors will not tag it further or submit the article for deletion - a process which seems to always end in deletion - unfortunately. See articles Bauer or Rookwood Pottery - both have been reproduced and they both have sections named "Revival." I prefer to give an editor who has worked so much on an article the time to improve it themselves. The Malibu Tile company (short-lived for sure) is an important article. If you need any assistance or have any questions, do let me know. All editors are allowed to remove tags - except in the case of deletion tags. Have fun - and take your time - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 01:01, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

OK, I have gone through the article and removed most references to Bob Harris and/or Malibu Ceramic Works. Please let me know what you think. Best, Dtopa Dtopa (talk) 01:04, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Dtopa, I created the article Malibu Potteries. I will make a few edits to Malibu tile - and get back to you as to my thoughts on the article's improvement. Your edits have been very helpful in resolving some of the issues - it is often referred to as "wikify." Sorry I haven't responded right away. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 00:47, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Dtopa, just a quick note - I made some changes - see what you think. Some of the images (Malibu/Replica) can be formatted as I have done to two sets of images. Go ahead and make changes, I think the article is coming along fine. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 01:34, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Spent a little more time on both articles. On Malibu tile, if you can, do distinguish & clarify - in text and captions - what is Malibu Potteries tile (vintage) and what is other pottery companies tile & products (including Malibu Ceramic Works) so the reader knows. Thank you. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 06:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I like the edits; makes the discussion clearer. I'll work on what's remaining today.Dtopa (talk) 13:23, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Dtopa, I am glad it all makes sense - I was short on the explanations of what I edited and the whys - having split Malibu Potteries I think helped. Malibu tile is clearer - and just a few tweaks will make it even better. I really like the edits to the lede you made. Have a great day - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 16:51, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Made a few edits and clarified the origins of other photographs. One thing I saw surprised me: the Research section was deleted and I understand your note saying that the section is not needed since those books are listed in the reference list. However, I believe when you deleted that section that also caused the books to be removed from the ref list. Is it that you don't think the books belong in this article or that is not the way to cite them or ? It's not a big deal to me--it's more that those books show how contemporary, reproduction tile is being used in Spanish revival architecture. Since there aren't that many extant structures that have original Malibu Potteries tile, these books convey how the Malibu style tile are used and have evolved. Best, Dtopa (talk) 18:37, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Dtopa - I will fix the citations for you since I broke them. Instead of "Research", normally a list of cited works is a sub-section under References or else if not cited a Further reading section is added. If cites are broken, normally the references will be in red indicating the cites have been broken and after the removal of the section this did not alert me the cites were messed up. Again, I will fix it and if the work isn't cited in the text then I can add the book to further reading. Normally (accepted MOS style) is to include works in Further reading which have not been cited. You can also use a General Reference section in the Section References for any works which were used in creating the article. I will fix this later as I am on an IPad which isn't the greatest device to use for major editing (as you can see here in my response!) - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 19:00, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Dtopa, I fixed the citations, added a Further reading section. I added a Gallery section as the images were overwhelming the text. Also added was an external link section. See what you think and if you need any other assistance or need me to clean-up any of my mistakes, do let me know. Have a great day. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 19:36, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Wow, I am blown away by how much better the article reads with your edits. Moving several of the pictures to the bottom, as Gallery items, is brilliant--it will allow me insert additional photos of interesting installations and not have to worry about understanding the entire context (I can caption them rather than having to write a lengthy paragraph, on a subject matter I might have to research). And the Links section is very useful for anyone wanting to find out more about Malibu Ceramic Works. Thank you so much. Dtopa (talk) 20:38, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind comments Dtopa, I think the article has been "wikified" so to speak. Feel free to continue to make additions and edits. If you have any other questions or need assistance, do let me know. Happy editing! Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 21:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

speedy deletion

Speedy deletion for "no context" is only used when we are unable to determine wha tthe article is about. A very short article, even unreferenced, about a specific named identifiable subject cannot be "no context" Please re-read WP:CSD. DGG ( talk ) 05:34, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you DGG for letting me know - after tagging I thought I was off, then became busy and forgot to remove the speedy deletion tag, sorry to have taken up your time. Have a great day - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Please, engage in discussion

Please, I ask of you to engage in discussion, at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Industrial_design#Archived_threads_reverted.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 05:27, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Additionally, it looks like your edit may have violated the WP:ROLLBACK tool parameters for use. Please, don't do that again. Per WP:ROLLBACK, it should only be used in cases of obvious vandalism -- and if not obvious vandalism, an explanation should be provided on a talk page for why that tool was used. — Cirt (talk) 05:31, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thanks for being so understanding, and my sincere apologies about the confusion! :) — Cirt (talk) 05:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

No problem Cirt, thank you! Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 05:52, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Lincoln, NE photos

Contents of discussion

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nighttime_skyline_of_downtown_Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA_(2015,_from_Arnold_Height_Park).jpg :) Hanyou23 (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Hanyou23, this is the most beautiful image I have seen of Lincoln - actually quite amazing and enchanting! It definitely belongs in the Lincoln article. I have been pretty much a shadow on WP lately, though I created some new articles last month or so. Mostly I have been reverting vandalism on articles I watch and commenting here & there on discussions - which I have learned mostly go nowhere. Have a great day! Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 22:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey Gmcbjames :) ! Thanks for the kind words on the photo ^_^ ... made a huge, late hike up a hill to take it :p heh. Well, you can kind'a see what I've been up to on WP over the past few months... not much ~o~ . Wife had our second daughter (nearly a month old now), so things are kind'a getting back to norman but not-so-much :p . I'm also slowly getting back into the groove of editing, etc., on WP, but slowly :o ... fall is here and the seasons are changing - more inside time on the clock ;) . We'll see what happens :o - planning on getting back onto the Lincoln article later, but not to the degree, like last, where I got burned brain-wise :p . There are a few additional photos I'll be uploading here sometime soon - seems like a good place to start :) .

Ah well, I'll be around ;) . Will keep in touch and will let you know what my plans are when I have them :p ^_^ (and will post the latest, uploaded photos here also). Cheers and until later ^^ ! Hanyou23 (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I see our good friend is back, watching the Lincoln article (the one form out west). It's good to be in Nebraska :D hahah :p (what am I trying to say here :o ???)~ Hanyou23 (talk) 23:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

I am glad you are back on WP Hanyou23 - you are right take it slow. Congratulations on your second daughter!!! I edit here and there - and have become more laid back - it is just too easy to become over-involved with editing WP. Although I enjoy commenting on discussions here and there. As you can tell, very little was done on Lincoln - and yes I am surprised the editor out NE west popped up so quickly - I think as a photographer he has an image thing. I do think the image you just placed would be nicer if it was larger - you can edit it or I might. It is such a great image of the city - and very great of you to have given it to commons - I think you could have sold it!!! Well, have fun with the kids and edit lightly!! Cheers - and if you haven't figured it out - which I think you have - my name is James - Gmcbjames (talk) 00:54, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for the late reply :) ... been so busy lately >< ! Busy daddy's feeling a bit cooped up lately >o< ~ heheh. Hmmm, I don't know if I did really figure out your name before :o ... although now that I relook at your username, I give myself a facepalm :p (doh >o< !). Ah well ;p . I wish there was an easier way we could do some direct communications somehow :/ ... I've never checked what WP's policy is on that :o . I'd tell my name here, but I'd prefer to do it direct because... well, back in the days before Google began swallowing up and caching the internet, I used my username everywhere (and continue to do so ><' )... so it's kind'a easy to follow what I do on the internet... that's kind'a why I try to keep the rest (like my name & photos of myself - you can't find a photo of me anywhere on the web because there are none >:D bwahahah~!) disassociated from my username so that it makes it a little harder to connect the one with the two :p . Is there any possibility that we can communicate any more directly :/ ??? Sorry for asking ~o~ .....

Actually, I've just searched for my username over on Google and I was surprised by how many sites have been using my Lincoln photos with credit :o ! Interesting :D ~

Anyways, I'll head on over to that edit you mentioned over on my userpage and see what's up :) . Hopefully I can get onto WP a little more in the immediate future - no work for a couple of weeks unlike this last week, so we'll see if I have more time possibly ;o ??? Heh :p ~

Sooner-than-later and cheers ^_^ ! Hanyou23 (talk) 18:47, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi again Gmcbjames! You might like this one ;) :.....
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Capital_Parkway_(looking_NNW_from_S._27th_at_sunset),_Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA.jpg Hanyou23 (talk) 07:14, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Hanyou23, I have email from users enabled on my preferences, so you can always email me by using the link under the user tab "Email user." (WP:EMAIL). So glad you checked out the change on the neighborhood page - I believe the shopping center was once called Arapahoe Village rather than Indian Village since it was off of Arapahoe street. However whatever the neighborhood calls itself should be used. Have a great day, now off to check for more little tasks on WP, though I really should concentrate on a new article! Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey Gmcbjames :) ... learn something new everyday :D ! May have to send you an email later this evening ;) ... first this afternoon, I have to figure out an issue with the high idle on my motorcycle, then later watch the Democratic debate on CNN :p ...

Yeah, I now remember back in the day the Indian Village Shopping Center was named Arapahoe Village :o ... I wonder why the name changed :/ . I have a guess but one can never be too sure :p ~

Would you mind if I asked a favor, please ^_^ ? If you would, please have a look at this userpage I stumbled across this morning:...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Waldorfbp

This user, for the most part, recently copied my userpage. What's up with this >:/ ??? I briefly searched for a help topic about users who copy other userpages, but came up empty :p . What do you think about this :o ???

Ah well, the weather's going to hit 80° today... might as well strike outside while the getting is good :p . Cheers and until later ^^ !~ Hanyou23 (talk) 18:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Hanyou23, I have run across this before where a user copies another user's page. The practice is frowned upon although even our own pages are "free use." I noticed the user has had some warnings and also both you and the editor edited the same article which is where he probably liked your page and then copied it. It is bad form to copy almost verbatim another userpage. In another instance I read on a talk page the editor who's page was copied left a note on the copying editors talk page. If I run across a guideline or policy, I will you know, however I would leave a note on the editors talk page - like - "Assuming creation of your userpage was made in good faith, I would appreciate you not copying my userpage almost word for word including userboxes." Hope this helps - and frankly it is creepy the user did this! Cheers - Gmcbjames (talk) 23:36, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Gmcbjames, will do - thank you for the advice ^_^ !

One other thing that I noticed today... at the bottom of some pages, it says to "Mark this page as patrolled" or something. I know what patrolling is - thanks to you ;) , but I don't think I've ever seen this before :o . Did I miss it in the past :o ??? I'm 98.5% positive that I don't have such capabilities :o ... a.k.a. "Patroller". Did I really just miss the ability all of this time @o@ ???!!!!! Hanyou23 (talk) 00:01, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hanyou23, yes you had the ability to mark patrolled on pages! All registered users do - I guess it isn't advertised as users should be knowledgeable as to what WP is and isn't - as well as the concept of what is notable and not - although some users IMO have no idea of what is notable if it isn't in the news or accessible online - book - what is a book? I only patrol pages if I know about the subject and I am willing to vouch for the article if another editor disagrees. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 00:13, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gmcbjames! Nah, I don't plan on patrolling because I an't an expert in anything :p heh! Anyways, never got around to that email ~o~ ... time flies and so does time >_> . Oh well :p ... three upcoming photos coming your way to enjoy :) . Until later ^_^ :~..... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sunken_Gardens_(inside_1),_Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA.jpg Hanyou23 (talk) 05:37, 16 October 2015 (UTC) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sunken_Gardens_(inside_2),_Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA.jpg Hanyou23 (talk) 05:51, 16 October 2015 (UTC) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sunken_Gardens_(from_near_the_SE_entrance_2),_Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA.jpg  :) (that's all :p ~) Hanyou23 (talk) 06:08, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Hanyou23, you can always email me. Great images of the sunken garden - I updated the article Sunken Gardens (Nebraska) - for something to do - you can add your images or replace the ones on the article if you wish. Thanks for sharing the great images! - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:41, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

(very AOL-ish :o - I didn't ping your alert box twice just now, did I >o> ???~.....) Hanyou23 (talk) 07:15, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Hanyou23, only one ping - another ping was for an article I created which was patrolled - which really makes me happy (it could have been deleted or mass tagged!) Have a great day! - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gmcbjames! Got your AOL-ish ;p :) . Got my hand full with stuff going on the house right now ~o~ . I'll proably be able to get back a reply tonight - might be able to do a few additional, brief edits on the Lincoln page between now-and-then... but then again I have my honey-do list, two of the four that are taking a nap and the youngest who is wide awake >o< . Sooner than later ^_^ . Cheers back ^^ ! Hanyou23 (talk) 19:32, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Eishindo

Hello, you have set a flag for speedy deletion in an article on Eishindo and placed a comment on my talk page about it. I have no idea what that is, I certainly didn't write anything on this topic. Altaphon (talk) 06:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Altaphon, there must have been a burp in the nomination notification where you notified about an article you didn't edit. No worries, go ahead and delete the notification on your talk page if you wish. Thank you for letting me know. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

More photos of Lincoln, NE

Contents of discussion

Hi Gmcbjames! Sorry for my absence - life has taken a front seat again >< (including work :p ). Here's one more photo... one that I've been trying to upload for a number of days >< (UW seems like it was having issues - so in the end, I ended up using the old, upload page >_> ). Less than a week until the wife is off of maternity leave - oh boy XD !!! Cheers ^^ !~
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lincoln_Fire_%26_Rescue_Department_Engine_No._2_(with_firefighters),_Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA.jpg
(hopefully I can get on WP a little more over this next week :p ~) Hanyou23 (talk) 21:25, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hanyou23 great image - of course - of the firefighters & Engine No. 2 - maybe a new article Lincoln Fire and Rescue Department or add it to Lincoln? You are going to have your hands full in less than a week!! Though it sounds awfully fun to me. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:07, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Seems other fire departments exist and there is a Wikiproject: Wikipedia:WikiProject Fire Service, so an article may be in order! It doesn't have to be anything other than a stub at this point, though I am sure either you or I can get an article going. Let me know - Gmcbjames (talk) 17:11, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gmcbjames. Yeah, I'm kind'a debating on what to work on next... there is so much >< . I still have those references to clean up... and the Lincoln tourism page to fix. Still gott'a get the main Lincoln article to GA eventually... still have work to do on that (not in a big rush ;) ). Ah, well, winter's coming, so there'll be extra time to do everything :p . Anyways...

Here's a couple of facts that I new about Lincoln for years (a decade or two) but I've been having trouble finding reliable sources. Here's the first - #19 on the list:

http://www.50states.com/facts/nebraska.htm

...and the second, well, the article was in the Journal Star back in the 1990s... had a picture of the police chief, mayor, fire chief, civil defense director, etc., on top of the old Lincoln Hotel building next to the old, Thunderbolt siren that's still up there... photo taken during the 1950s. Anyways, the article was about the first siren test in Lincoln - preparing the city for the cold war and basically overall, how Lincoln was a test-model city for the rest of the nation on how to prepare cities for the possibility of WWIII. Can't find the article online... but did 'ya ever wonder why we have so many underground reservoirs here in Lincoln instead of water towers? The siren coverage like it is? All the fallout shelters throughout the city (back in the day) - enough to house 2/3rds of the city's population? Also maybe, why there are - or at least were those tunnels between Lincoln High/capitol/Pepsi bottling plant/governor's mansion/Masonic Temple. Yep, you've got it :p - because Lincoln was a test-model city ;p (from what I can remember of the article :o ~).

As I remember, one of the first national civil defense directors after the cold war had started was the former governor of Nebraska... so that, I think, is the reason why Lincoln was chosen to be a test-model city. I remember seeing a clip of the director. Oh wait :p ! I did find something to the effect here :p :...

http://www.nebraskastudies.org/0900/frameset_reset.html?http://www.nebraskastudies.org/0900/stories/0901_0130.html

Correction - Governor Val Peterson was the director. Here's a YouTube video of him here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXxaWGwIWdg

(it's especially interesting at the end)

Anyways, just a few notes here of things that I've been wanthing to add about the history of Lincoln (tangent ><' !~) - if I can ever get my p's and q's together about it :p . Cheers and until later ^_^ ~ Hanyou23 (talk) 06:33, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Hanyou23, in elementary school I was taught "duck and cover," and we had weekly drills - though now it seems so hilarious as to being any good at all! At 27th & Capital pkwy, there was the largest of the Civil Defense shelters - still I think it is there. When Gateway was built, there was a shelter built underground with it's own entrance packed with rations - yes the "Nebraska bisquits!" and water. The sirens went off every one day a week at 5pm as I remember, people used to set their clocks to the siren! From what you have uncovered, it all now makes sense as I have lived all over the country and never have seen such a coordinated effort. I believe at the time, everyone knew there was shelter for many but not everyone. Because SAC was in Omaha, Lincoln knew it would be a first strike. In the farmlands around Lincoln there were many missile silos with warheads. The warheads were dismantled beginning in the 70s. This history most probably is now in just books as internet history is too recent. I would suggest for sources to try the Lincoln Library. They had the CD manuals on display during the time period at every branch - I remember seeing these as they outlined the CD. I remember a drill where the whole town (a small town outside of Lincoln) had an army drill where "an enemy" parachuted down and the townsfolk had to find them. Kind of surreal, though quite fun as a child. It is good to finally understand Lincoln was a model city for CD and why. This also explains why Lincoln was so active during the 70s with anti-war demonstrations - we knew as children ducking and covering was not an answer!

Feel free to add what you can - source what you can and if it is non-controversial text then add it - although if contested the text may be challenged by another editor. Most sources will be primary sources, to avoid original research all you have to do is to not synthesize the information and keep only to the facts. The you-tube video has another source and I would use that source, it is a primary source either way, you can use the cite news template. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:51, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Gmcbjames... Uuh, I'm so run down ~_~ ... 2.5 month old and four year old keeping me running in circles >< ... no time for anything :( ... and technicians who can't figure out why a heat pump isn't working ><' ! Anyways, just wanted to stop by to share this link with you :) . Cheers ^^ !~

http://journalstar.com/gallery/news/photofiles-the-early-days-of-lincoln/collection_78351d68-5717-56f2-85ae-61bec35dc29a.html#0 Hanyou23 (talk) 06:37, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Lincoln

Hanyou23, you do have your hands full. I have been taking a wikibreak myself with only minor edits and keeping a watch on my watch list. Great link for vintage photos - it is most enjoyable, I may get the book for fun! Hopefully in the near future I can move forward with some new articles and - when you are able - which will be awhile - to assist you with taking the Lincoln article to GA class. Thankfully there is no time limit on WP! Enjoy & Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:04, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Gmcbjames - Yeah, been soooo busy - sorry for my absence :p . Too many things to do, too little time :/ . Ah well, anyways, I came across this article last night and thought you'd might be interested in seeing this, too :) . I was a bit surprised when I saw it :o - how times really change ^_~ heheh... just a big melting pot, which is super :D ! Anyways, until later... hopefully sooner, but we'll see ;) heh~

http://www.1011now.com/home/headlines/Special-Report-Preparing-for-A-New-Life--A-New-Language-352972291.html

Cheers ^_^ ! Hanyou23 (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Hanyou23, what an interesting article. This is what makes Lincoln great! Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:25, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Gmcbjames - Hi ^_^ ! Been doing a few, slight edits on Lincoln recently and last night, I added a subsection under education. Would you mind having a look at it, please :o ? It seems a bit out of place, but I was a little conflicted on where to put it :o . Maybe creating a new refugee/immigrant section in the Lincoln article - under Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline, section 13 (topics specific to city) could apply to such a new section - would be a good idea :o ? Your thoughts :) ? I plan on adding a couple more things about refugees/immigrants (with the other stuff under the revitalization section, I believe :o ~), as soon as I can find some references for them ^_~ . Any who, thanks in advance and cheers as always ^^ (hope you're having a groovy December ;D ~)!..... Hanyou23 (talk) 06:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Hanyou23, I like the new information included under education and other information regarding Lincoln as a refugee city throughout the article, although a separate section may be a possibility in the future. A summary addition to the lead section as a refugee city needs to be added. I will look at the article and see what I can do after your edits. Sorry for my response - if it doesn't make sense - my brain seems to be frozen - or taking a day off - my brain has a mind for itself. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:04, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gmcbjames - well life is flying as always :/ ... to much to do, not much time to do it in ;p heheh. Still wish I had 36 hours in a day ;) . Ah well, anyways, haven't had much time to do much work on WP recently, unfortunately :/ . I see our friend from out west decided to do a few things to the Lincoln page and made it *uglier!* (yikes >< ~), but I'm not going to pick a battle right now :o . Anywho, I uploaded a few more pics... not my own, but I've known that these have existed for a while, so I decided to do something different this morning - before it gets chaotic around here again and while it's below freezing out ;p meh~. Anyways, here they are :) :... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Thomas_P._Kennard_%26_John_Gillespie_Houses_(1872),_Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA_(looking_NNW_from_State_Capitol,_1872).jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lincoln,_Nebraska,_USA_(looking_NW_from_State_Capitol,_1872).jpg
Otherwise, over the past few months, this little project has preoccupied me for quite a few nights recently when everyone is in bed ;p :... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc71GcLSBZo
Anyways, hope all is well with you recenly and until later ^_^ (and Happy New Years, too ^^ !)~ Hanyou23 (talk) 18:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hanyou23, Happy New Year to you too! I have been making some tweaks here and there, although I have taken a break for awhile from WP. Thanks for uploading some great historical images for the Lincoln articles. I have noticed a number of tweaks to the Lincoln article as editors will do, not sure if they are an improvement IMO. Have fun with the snow on the plains - and be safe! Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hey Gmcbjames :) - I thought West Lincoln was its own town at one time :p heh... I think we were both debating this a while back ^_~ :...

http://journalstar.com/lifestyles/jim-mckee-west-lincoln-almost-an-industrial-success/article_80bdfa06-b94e-5de9-9c3a-f35d2f30d482.html

As always, hope all is well and happy spring ^^ (so hard to believe we're nearly to spring already @o@ *yikes*~)!!! Hanyou23 (talk) 03:42, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

What a great article by McKee - finally the whole story! Thank you for thinking of me. Have a great spring - and it is probably happening soon for you. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:52, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Help with Hansjörg Wyss?

Hi there! I'm reaching out to see if you have any interest in taking a look at the Hansjörg Wyss article. I made a specific request over on the Talk page and I am hoping to find someone to edit the Synthes USA section. I understand if you do not have the time, but you were so helpful on the Steelcase article, I thought I'd ask! I should note that have a financial conflict of interest with this article and will not be making edits myself. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 18:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Heatherer, I implemented your request for the Wyss article, and left a comment on the article's talk page. Good luck - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 00:15, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I don't think I can articulate how much I appreciate your help and input. I've been discussing this part of the article for several months—so it's great to see the changes implemented! Thanks again, Heatherer (talk) 18:27, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi again! I just wanted to bring one other project I've been working on to your attention. I posted a new draft for the Uproxx article back in November, but have had no luck getting any editors to review. If you look at the entry, I think you'll see why it needs a rewrite—it's incomplete, outdated, and has weak sourcing. Just throwing it out there in case you have any interest in taking a look. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 21:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Just coming back to note that my request on Uproxx has been taken care of. Thanks!Heatherer (talk) 18:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Heatherer, I am glad to see the article has been updated. Good work and thank you for your contributions, professionalism, and patience. Gmcbjames (talk) 01:57, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reassessing the past several articles that I have been working on! Aoba47 (talk) 22:36, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Aoba47, thank you for all the hard work you put into making WP articles the best they can be. You may wish to take the articles you have worked on to the Good Article level as I believe they are ready. To nominate, just follow the instructions at WP:GAI. If you need any assistance, just let me know. Again, thank you and it has been a pleasure. Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:18, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! I will definitely check it in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 18:17, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at Cherokee, Oklahoma for me! Jsniessen (talk) 19:37, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3