This is an archive of past discussions about User:PointsofNoReturn. 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.
Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 48,304,647 users!
Hello, PointsofNoReturn. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions! I'm This lousy T-shirt, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
Some pages of helpful information to get you started:
Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes(~~~~) at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.
The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun! To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own private sandbox for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Looks like you're on the receiving end of VictorD7's frustrations. This RFC stems from a couple of editors who have banded together to dismiss the findings of the OEDC (a non-partisan group) that had done a global analysis of how progressive taxes are by nation. The OECD has no dog in the US debates about how progressive the US is or not.
The report is behind a paywall, but it has been covered by these sources [1], [2], [3]. This doesn't mean the US has the most progressive spending which is separate from tax policy. When compared to peer nations, the US lags in that regard but Lawrencehkoo and EllenCT conflate the two and have tried to expand the scope to a broader topic of income inequality (which has its own articles).
Instead of accepting a reliable source, a couple of editors started bringing in their opinions and citing a single source [ITEP] that takes an unusual approach to calculating total taxes including state and local. But even one of those editors has admitted that with current (as of 2013) tax law, taxes on even the 1% are progressive.
I don't expect this to change your opinion on the matter, but I wanted provide some focus on where this comes from.Mattnad (talk)
Mattnad Thanks for the message. I still think the tax loopholes make the system less progressive, but I see where you are coming from. In my eyes this is all opinion based. I still think saying that the US has the most progressive tax policy is a bit misleading, but that is just me. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 15:05, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Interview request for The Center Line
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The editors of The Center Line, the quarterly newsletter of the U.S. Roads WikiProject are asking if you, as an editor new to USRD, would be willing to answer three quick questions for an interview featurette in our next issue.
What article(s) are you working on these days?
What is your short-term goal for the article(s)? Long-term?
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Charmcaster.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Latest comment: 10 years ago53 comments2 people in discussion
After leaving the library Sunday, I decided to take the detour over to Chappaqua since the headwaters aren't too far from where I was getting on the Taconic anyway.
The Saw Mill just below its source
It may be easier to get a picture of the source than we thought. Not too far to the SE of the pond is Fair Ridge Cemetery (I think that's its name). I drove in, went over the hill, and then parked at the end of the driveway here. The woods, as that image suggests, are not too far away, and I was able to walk down into them to the river's headwaters and take a picture (which I haven't processed yet, much less uploaded). At that point, and this time of year, the stream bed is not totally full, but there's definitely enough water to sustain a flow.
It looks like it would be eminently possible to reach the source through the woods from the northwest corner of the cemetery by walking about 300 ft or so WNW into the woods from that point. The straight SE boundary of the pond suggests to me that it was created by impounding the brook at some point in the past, so the source may actually be a small waterfall! (it would therefore make a nicer picture after some significant precipitation; however, I'd bring appropriate footwear if going under those conditions as it would be likely to be quite muddy)
Looking over the river now that I have access to ACME Mapper again, it is challenging to identify spots that might make for good photos, especially on the upper river. The Duck Pond in Chappaqua, we should have (and I had totally forgotten about it!), as it's sort of a local landmark and the uppermost significant impoundment of the river. There's also that small pond, quite likely that result of another impoundment, just north of Marcourt Drive, and a little section in front of someone's house to the E of the Quaker Road/Kipp Street intersection where they've actually got the Saw Mill channeled through their front lawn. If it's possible to get from near the Chappaqua station, there's its confluence with Chappaqua Brook (another named tributary we missed).
Downriver, it doesn't seem like there are too many bridges that would afford a good shot, not in the least because it remains a narrow stream for so much of its length. Not if you want to get a shot of a sort of wild-looking river, although this area, at some large nursery complex between the parkway and 91, looks interesting. Or here, a little bit to the SW. And this bridge, if it isn't some sort of corporate facility you can't get into.
These ballfields near Elmsford are very close to the Rum Brook confluence, which might also be a nice image to have. Woodlands Lake, of course, demands not only a picture but probably its own article as well. And even further south, the Ravensdale Road bridge probably could offer a more rivery-looking photo. Or Farragut Avenue.
@Daniel Case: That's great. I am planning on taking a picture of the Saw Mill River in Ardsley since I can walk there. There is a bridge that goes across the Thruway, the river, and the Parkway all at once (Ashford Avenue) and the river is clearly visible. I also just realized that there is a tributary to the river in Ardsley that we missed. The creek does not show up on Google Maps and I am not entirely sure if it is a true river or a sewage river. Either way, I can take a picture of that too very easily. I can also take pictures of the Saw Mill near trees and when it goes behind the buildings in Ardsley. As for Woodlands lake, I know a good spot to take a picture of it, and it may be possible to include an image of the outflow waterfall for an article about just woodlands lake. A closer shot of the lake would be from the park the lake is in, which has its only entrance from the parkway and the South County Trail. That makes it problematic for me since I do not have a car and would need to make a large semi-circle to get on the trailway. Instead I will settle for a picture of the lake from 9A and attempt to get a better picture at a future date. As for an image of the source, I will attempt to get a ride from my father to the source of the river. I would probably do what you said and go through the cemetery. I would then simply walk up the river along the shore or in the river itself. I am also not entirely sure where the river comes out of the pond. My phone placed the source of the river slightly west of where we thought it was originally. That would also be something we could take note of by going to the source of the river. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 16:52, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't know how your schedule in the next couple of weeks is, but I would not be adverse to setting up a day where I could drive down there and we could go take all the pictures we'd need (I have started a Commons category now for the river). Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I just uploaded a set of pictures of the Saw mill River in Ardsley. They are from my cell phone camera because my actual camera is broken. Therefore the quality is not the best on some of the pictures. They are now on commons in the new wikimedia category on the Saw Mill River (thank you for creting that category by the way). PointsofNoReturn (talk) 17:24, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Given more time and more direct light, I could do a lot better. Do you think you could get some pictures from a bridge, looking upstream (I always shoot watercourses looking upstream; they inevitably look better that way)? I'll see if I can edit yours and tease some more color out of them. Daniel Case (talk) 19:55, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
That would be great if you could edit them. Also, the one from the Ardsley bridge (with the Thruway on the left)is looking upstream. Sadly, the river is not flowing that fast. I will see if I can find another spot to take a picture of the river. Lawrence street, one river crossing south of Ashford Avenue, looks like a good candidate. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 20:00, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Go for it! Don't worry about the river not looking vivacious; much of the Saw Mill is like that, meaning we have at least a couple of representative pictures of it now, in warm weather when leaves are green. Daniel Case (talk) 20:07, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
I have added one of those more recent pictures you took from Nepera Park (was it Yonkers or Hastings? The description says the former but the filename reflects the latter (don't worry; we can fix that at Commons with a file move). It's an improvement, which I further improved myself. We are getting closer to the best possible picture.
In other developments, I will not be going down to Westchester today ... I had to spend most of the day waiting for a guy to come and check our furnace before winter #AdultProblems. So I'll see about tomorrow ... there might be some rain in the morning but then that might help things out for later photography. Daniel Case (talk) 18:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
I was not sure exactly where I took the pictures myself. I had to look at a map after the fact to find out that I was in Northern Yonkers along the Parkway, not southern Hastings. I do not remember what exit, but I know it was south of Farragut Parkway (which is the last exit on the parkway in Hastings according to Google Maps). Also, thanks for improving the pictures. I am going to be buying a new charger for my regular camera so that my pictures will be better quality. Also, thanks for taking pictures of the river. I have been busy due to staying up late to finish my schoolwork #StudentProblems. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Flooding problems
Also, the Saw Mill River has a tendency to flood after large rainstorms. I have seen VE MAcy Park in Ardsley underwater after heavy rain, including after Hurricane Sandy. The river also floods the parkway at times, and the parkway needs to be shutdown when that happens. Perhaps you could incorporate that into the River Course section somehow? I might incorporate the Hurricane Sandy flooding in the history section. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 20:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
The river's flooding problems are not really part of its course. They should be treated as part of its history (and given the transportation routes that follow and have followed it, we should really make an effort to find some historical info on that, since that might be the saw Mill's most important contribution to regional development) or given a separate section as some of the FAs do to their rivers. Daniel Case (talk) 21:16, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
And here's the New York Times, again on this, albeit from the late 1980s. Seems like the issue is whether to elevate the road at Pleasantville, which the locals are opposed to. Daniel Case (talk) 21:30, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
That article is great for a section on flooding, which will be in the history section, most likely in recent history. Included will be reports from when Hurricane Sandy made landfall. The construction and flooding of the parkway will also be mentioned. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 21:57, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Great editorial from 2005 that finds a four-line verse about how horrid the river was in the late 19th century that is old enough for us to quote in its entirety.
'Tis now, at Yonkers's spreading feet,
A flow with odorous sins replete; Its nitid bosom has become
I have also added the article to the WP:RIVERS work list via the talk page banner. It occurred to me that there are some FAs which might be more akin to this, and indeed there are two on streams of similar length across the country, both of which flow through the Portland metropolitan area:
The example would be not quite so much how they're organized but the scope of information in them. Like the Saw Mill, large portions flow through a heavily populated and developed area, sometimes channelizing the creek like the Saw Mill is in Yonkers. I'm willing to bet the people who wrote those articles would be happy to help with any suggestions on where to get information. Daniel Case (talk) 20:24, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
And, if you want, the best river article I've ever done: Esopus Creek. I haven't even taken it to GA yet because it's missing stuff (pictures of people fly fishing on the river, perhaps even taking a rainbow trout; a whole section on the mud problems in the lower creek, and perhaps more). Also check out Moodna Creek, closer to (my) home, which is ... well, I'd say it's getting there. Daniel Case (talk) 20:32, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the models. I will use them to model the rest of the Saw Mill River history I am currently writing. The Industrial era section will have to be more detailed than it is currently. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 20:01, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
All it really needs to be is cool enough. Which suggests another photo idea. Most rivers that size cool off enough to be good trout water come next month. People might fish them on weekends. I just don't know where—maybe you could ask at a sporting-goods or bait shop in the area what the popular spots are. Or, what the hell, I could bring my own fly rod and gear down and allow myself to be photographed. Daniel Case (talk) 00:40, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I know a sporting shop on Saw Mill River Road (how ironic!). I could go ask them there if they know where people flyfish on the Saw Mill River. I am assuming that the fish are not that big. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 00:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I just looked at the external link titled course of the Saw Mill River on Open Street Map. Open Street Map puts the source of the Saw Mill River at the confluence of two smaller rivers, not at the pond near where you took the picture. The confluence of the rivers is south of the pond. The one to the west is where you took the picture. The one to the right is the other tributary. The Saw Mill River Coalition here [1] puts the source of the river where we thought it was before in a pond in New Castle. I want to believe the Saw Mill River coalition and google maps on this one, but Google Maps has been wrong before. Anyway, I am just mentioning this here to notify you about the discrepancy between open street map and google maps. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 00:52, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
OSM is wonderful. But while the USGS map doesn't actually describe the stream flowing back to the pond from downtown Chappaqua as part of the Saw Mill, I think Google is right to fill in the gaps and use the name Saw Mill all the way back to the pond. After all, we don't know why whoever put that KML course there chose that point as the source—maybe they just didn't know the area well enough. Daniel Case (talk) 03:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I looked at Open Street Map to see what they put at that location: Nothing. They follow the river back to a little above the Duck Pond, then let it apparently peter out. They don't start using the name until two streams merge just south of the town line. That's a subjective choice to me, and we don't know who made it and why. I'd stick with the coalition and Google, who seem to be following the USGS map, which is the argument-settler. Daniel Case (talk) 04:00, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: I am in the process of determining the copyright of the images on the website. Some of the images would be great to use. There is one image of the source of the river on the page (I think, I will have to find that out 100%). There is also an image in the flume where the river flows under Yonkers. Lastly, there is an image of the pollution on the river, but that one I found out is copyrighted. I am currently in contact with the Saw Mill River Coalition about the copyright status of the images. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 18:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
You know, we really should see how they might want to help us. They'd love it if Wikipedia had a thorough article on the river. They might have stuff they don't use on their website that we can use with the appropriate authorization. Maybe we could even go down to their headquarters and do a mini edit-a-thon.
Also re images: Jury duty notwithstanding, when I can I'm thinking of getting down there with my camera again and shooting away. The pictures I'd love to get would be the flooded parkway—we should keep our heads up for any heavily rainy day coming up, especially with fall coming and the likelihood of wetter weather. Something like this, but in higher res. Daniel Case (talk) 05:32, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I had thought of nominating the work we've done so far for DYK, but in the confusion of Labor Day weekend and doing jury duty we sort of missed the deadline (well, it had been expanded enough, but we needed more sourcing for the potential hooks I've id'ed and I just didn't have the gas in the tank to do it all and nominate it). But we have a week to do it again if we get it to GA. I am guessing that is what you and Mike would like to do? Daniel Case (talk) 05:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Another article we could work on after is the Bronx River. The article is currently start-class. It is also mid-importance in wikiproject hudson valley and wikiproject New York City. I just added wikiproject rivers to the article and gave it a low importance on the scale for rivers. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 20:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Discharge Data
@Daniel Case:
There is some conflicting data on USGS sites. [2] The 1983 study only averaged the streamflow from 1945-1983. That is where the 32 cubic feet per second comes from. meanwhile, this source also from the USGS goes up to 1995. At that point, I assume that the gage was removed. The sad part is that we do not have current data for the streamflow so it is likely that the average will be off by a bit if the data extended to today. In addition, the study includes water that was taken out of the river for other purposes in its calculated streamflow. The streamflow average up to 1989 before the streamflow was not measured for four years and including a skip of 1974 is 34.0 cubic feet per second. No matter what we do the data will not be current. Should we use the 1983 study's data or this other source's data? PointsofNoReturn (talk) 01:50, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
I think the 1983 source is better since it's more consistent and is part of a scientific study rather than raw data like the stuff on the USGS site. The two figures are close enough. Daniel Case (talk) 01:53, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: If we are going to use the 1983 study data, there is two sets of discharge data. One accounts for the withdrawal of water from the river for other purposes (the number we have) while the other one does not. Should we use the larger number including the withdrawl of water or the smaller number just measuring water that goes by the gauge? PointsofNoReturn (talk) 02:21, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: The smaller number is 28.9 cubic feet per second. Also, the maximum instaneous flow rate on the river according to the source is 1020 cubic feet per second, not 1840 cubic feet per second as the article says currently. I will be changing the maximum flow rate after this edit.PointsofNoReturn (talk) 02:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
It might. I did not know where the larger number came from. That is why I reverted the max and min data to the 1983 study. Do you know which source stated the large maximum discharge data? PointsofNoReturn (talk) 02:55, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
I was able to access the link from my talk page. The highest number according to this is 1840 cubic feet per second. I just added back the old number with new data and made the references for the data more direct. Also, the larger and smaller numbers are from the same study. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 17:39, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Got back to the river
Last week, on Wednesday, before my computer decided it was going to take a day off, I went back down to Chappaqua with my camera and began exploring and shooting.
In my continuing attempt to be the Richard Francis Burton of the Saw Mill, I got closer to the source, but not all the way there. I got close enough to see it, though About a hundred river-feet (50-60 linear feet) short of the source you reach a chainlink fence in the woods that marks the property line. It might have been possible to get over it, but I did not think it worth it. It seems like it's on the property of this house, since its rear is visible a short distance away. I bet they wouldn't mind letting people back there to take a picture. Maybe the SMRC people could liaise?
Although those extremest headwaters aren't terribly photogenic. I didn't see much that was an improvement from the picture I already took.
It appears I did not go far enough down Marcourt Drive or Kipp Road to take pictures from the crossings (especially of the pond at the former). I will have to return. But I did get plenty more around the Duck Pond, from the confluence with Tertia Brook near train station, and so on wherever I could down through Pleasantville and into Hawthorne. It gets harder to get to as it goes south, but I did my best given the circumstances. At the Grant Street exit on the parkway I got a nice pic where the river looks like a drainage ditch, sort of summing up the relationship between the two.
I also had another great idea. I have twice seen Andrew Lih talk at Wikimania about video, and how our articles could have more. So I brought a camcorder and took what video I could. Maybe eventually we can put one together from Chappaqua to Yonkers for the course section. It would go further than the photos can. Daniel Case (talk) 03:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: Thank you for taking more pictures. I also have been speaking with a member of the Saw Mill River Coalition in order to get some of their pictures. She said that they are public domain but I am awaiting written permission as proof for the OTRS team. Two of the most critical pictures are a picture of the polluted river and an underground picture of the river in Yonkers.
With respect to the video, how would this work? We can't take a boat down the river because it is too shallow. I'm assuming we would not walk down the entire river and video our trip. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 23:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
No, just shots of the river from bridges and its banks at various accessible points along its course. (Of course, if someone has access to a quadcopter, we can get some aerial shots too, especially of inaccessible areas). I think I will go back down there tomorrow ... the weather should be much nicer than last Wednesday. Daniel Case (talk) 04:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
OK, I was able to visit the upper (as in, above I-287) Saw Mill again yesterday. I got some better pictures of the extreme headwaters, that whole area of which now seems to have once been a pond many years ago. At the property line downstream there is clearly an old dam that has collapsed where the river has flown through it over the years, and a curving stone retaining wall on the west side. My guess is that it was a farm pond created when the Quakers dominated that area ... I should look into that history of the area some more, perhaps see what the New Castle town historian might now.
Further downstream, I got pictures and video of the Marcourt Lane and Kipp Street crossings. Both very interesting ... it seems the river is impounded and channelized quite a lot even there, to make for creative landscaping.
I was able to get some pictures at Rosedale Nursery (where they also have a dam, and it actually looks quite pretty below it ... might make for a nice fall picture). I was also hoping to get some pictures from the stretch in Pleasantville where it flows nice and wild (the sort of pic I'm hoping for as a lead image) next to the parkway. I got some, but then a county cop told me you can't park alongside the parkway. If I wanted to see the river up close and photograph it, he suggested, I should go hike in Graham Hills Park along the bike trails. So, I'll do that next time I'm down there ... we should definitely have an article about it anyway, as it's the largest protected area in the river's watershed and apparently a popular destination with city-based mountain bikers since it's easy to reach from the Metro-North Pleasantville station or the parkways. It will entail some bushwhacking, though—I wore long hiking pants and boots today, which helped a lot near the headwaters (and in the flood plain near Pleasantville).
I also took pics of two of the tributaries—Tertia Brook (in the Chappaqua station parking lot) and Nannyhagen Brook alongside Lake St. in Pleasantville. That way we have some so we can create stubs and de-redlink them in the SMR article, which will be a must if we want to get it to FA eventually.
The weather was only slightly more cooperative today than last week. I suppose eventually it'll go right. Heck, to think I thought I could get this done in one single trip, and yet here it's been two and there will probably be more needed. Daniel Case (talk) 05:29, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
@Daniel Case:size That is great that you got back to the river. Did the photos come out well? Also, User:ɱ already uploaded a picture of the Chappaqua Duck Pond on Wikimedia Commons.
I'll probably be uploading some in a couple of days. As for the Duck Pond, it was a nice image but to really get a good picture, you're going to need to combine two images into a panorama. It's just too big. Daniel Case (talk) 06:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Third and probably last trip for a while today, because at least this time it was clear. Got some nice pics of the river at Rosedale Nurseries, and ... did the hike around Graham Hills Park that I wanted to so I could some genuinely wild pictures of that stretch of the river next to the parkway. Couldn't be as choosy as I'd like to have been, but the opportunities were there and I took them. Park was nice, too; if I ever write another area hiking guide I should try to put it in there. Daniel Case (talk) 04:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Saw Mill River may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
trailway and river all turn southwest, where they intersect the [[New York State Thruway]]) ([[Interstate 87]]) at an oblique angle. For the next mile the Thruway remains close to the river,
and it is considered to be environmentally impaired.<ref name="SMR Coalition"/> In a 1983 [[U.S> Geological Survey]], the concentrations of heavy metals in the water was found to increase the
Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give User:PointsofNoReturn/Omega Engineering a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Omega Engineering. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. —gdfusion (talk|contrib) 02:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
@Gdfusion: Sorry. I did not know that cut and paste moves are not allowed and that I should have done a move instead. I did that so I could transfer info from a draft to the article. My mistake. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 02:42, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello PointsofNoReturn. I've completed the history merge and thus repaired the cut-and-paste move. Thanks for your work on this article! EdJohnston (talk) 03:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You're right ... however, while I am responsible for a lot of that article the map is something I left no fingerprints on. You'll have to track down the user who made the original map (and, I suspect, may not really have been familiar enough with New York to realize he was making that error). Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
The Center Line: Summer 2014
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An topic you recently edited or contributed to Talk discussion on is the subject of discussion, if you would like to participate: [4]. This is a blanket notice given to all editors. DocumentError (talk) 03:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
ANI
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I meant to put it there. I knew the vandal would not read it, so I put it on the article. I can get rid of the template if you would like me to, and put it on the vandal's page. 72.240.132.127 (talk) 22:15, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
That's probably a good idea. Warning templates are not supposed to be in articles. Also, thanks for helping against vandalism. We need people like you in order to fight vandalism. Thank you. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 22:18, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I reverted you at abolitionism, where you wrote that the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in areas newly taken by Union forces from the Confederate forces. As I understand it, with some exceptions e.g. New Orleans, it applied to all areas in the Confederate States. in any case, you'd need a reference for such a fine point. Smallbones(smalltalk)03:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Please do not post seemingly hypothetical questions at the WP:Help Desk in order to get statements of policy with respect to a content dispute such as a proposed merge. That is wikilawyering. The actual issue isn't as straightforward as the hypothetical question, because the real question isn't about deleting an article in the usual sense but about merging it into another article. I think that I agree that the two articles should both be retained, but the way that you worded the question doesn't really relate to the merge issue. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:08, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon: I was trying to see if there was a wikipedia policy about the issue, but thank you for the advice. This was my first time asking a question at the help desk so I did not know what I was doing. Sorry for bothering you. 19:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Projects
Latest comment: 10 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
So, having finished most everything I can do related to Briarcliff (still waiting on uninvolved editors to GA/FA-review a few), I've been without much to do here, so I'm going to start work on a few various projects, one of which is the Pocantico River. Given your and Daniel's good work on the Saw Mill, I was wondering if you'd be interested in taking a look at this one. What do you think?--ɱ(talk)22:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Pretty bold for an already very developed article. It is messy, but the fact that it's so long and in-depth means that you'll have a lot more fixing to do; sometimes I've found it's almost better to start from scratch with such a task. I'll start thinking about ways of fixing and improving the article.--ɱ(talk)00:31, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Saw what you've done. Do you mind if I expand the course section to the level of detail the Saw Mill article has? Since it's a shorter stream it won't need to be as long. Daniel Case (talk) 05:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Raritan River, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mill Brook and Fox Creek. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
There is currently an requested move underway here and I am trying to get as many users to provide input as possible. I appreciate your contributions! - SantiLak(talk)23:52, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Whatever it helps as long as they abide to WP:NPOV policy, including UNDUE one. Be it a politician or a journalist or anyone prominent or from a prominent company or organization. Nevertheless, quotes are not easy to paraphrase. --George Ho (talk) 21:46, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
@George Ho: True. That is why I was thinking we should use Britain and France, and then the USSR and China. That would balance out communist countries with capitalist countries and achieve npov. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Saw Mill River, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philipse Manor. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Sorry I wasn't able to respond to you earlier ... I had a very busy end to my Thansgiving. I see what changes you made and you did well. Still looking good for getting the GA, it seems. (And afterwards I do still have it in mind to add some more 19th-century history that's relevant). Daniel Case (talk) 22:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: Thank you for the help with the article. I would love to see more 19th century history added (just noticed that the Saw Mill River Article is bigger than the Hudson River article, but that's fine). Let's see how far we can take this article. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 23:09, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 3
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Saw Mill River, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Putnam County. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 9 years ago17 comments3 people in discussion
Hi again, good work with the Saw Mill and thanks again for your help with the Pocantico. Wonder if we could get that to GA as well, and I know we should focus on the Hudson sometime...
Anyway, I'm wondering if you might be able to help me out with a small project. While employed and working on various social media projects, I did some work for Interactive Brokers' Wiki article. I posted a request over on the talk page, but as of yet, it doesn't look like anyone has had time to take a look. Because I was working for them, essentially many Wikipedians would be upset if I self-published my drafts, but having an uninvolved editor like you to publish them is okay. Mostly my changes distinguish IB from its parent, IBG; and work to improve the references, add information, give a neutral POV, and other things. I took photos for them too, and though I'm still waiting on a few screenshots, the rest should go out now. I'd reaally appreciate your help, especially as they'd rather like this done moderately soon. Ask any questions or make any changes to my draft or the real article; I'm fine with that. Thanks so very much.--ɱ(talk · vbm)00:06, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, anyone not associated with the company can help. I trust you've never even heard of IB (I hadn't until one of my relatives started working there).--ɱ(talk · vbm)01:04, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! To clarify, but you beat me to it in responding, I'm generally following the strictest COI guideline, Wikipedia:COI+, which only bans COI editors from editing the relevant pages. You're allowed to edit the IB article as much as you want, as you would be able to normally.--ɱ(talk · vbm)01:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Actually, the two drafts are separate because they represent two different things. "User:Ɱ/Interactive Brokers" is the draft for the smaller stock-trading company, while the draft "User:Ɱ/Interactive Brokers Group" is an overview of the parent company that also operates a number of subsidiaries that perform a variety of functions. As for the bullet points, WP:MOS doesn't actually discourage lists or bullet points, unless the text is more readable/understandable in prose. That's why lists can stay. The list of parks in my Briarcliff article uses bullets, but nobody even brought it up at the GA or FA reviews. I hope that clarifies this, and thanks again.--ɱ(talk · vbm)05:06, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
(←) Epicgenius and PointsofNoReturn: Yeah, I would like to merge the IB article, which right now muddles the situation of the more-well-known IB and the more-influential/larger IBG into one article, even though the two companies do separate things and have separate histories, founding dates, et cetera. So the history information you moved over to the Interactive Brokers article doesn't actually pertain to IB, but the whole of IBG, and therefore shouldn't really be there. Also, I wanted to mention that the book Automate This, which I give the full citation for in a few of my drafts, is a fantastic resource and a rather good read, especially if you're interested in anything as specific as this company or as broad as technology or the financial industry. Parts of it are readable on Google but it's also in plenty of libraries.--ɱ(talk · vbm)22:14, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Well I think that having two articles clears up the confusion and makes for increased distinguishment between the two, and I think that as it stands, both drafts have enough solid ground to be independent articles. Yeah, "User:Ɱ/Interactive Brokers" is rather short, but it's long enough and has enough third-party sources for an article. I'm not aiming for it to be a comprehensive GA (even though ideally I'd like that) but it's surely good enough for a stub- or start-class article.--ɱ(talk · vbm)22:32, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
I think this can be solved either using a dab page, or using yet another draft and merge the two companies' pages into one. Epicgenius (talk) 13:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to request that you take my word for it that the best option is for two separate articles; I have a good knowledge of the company and its operations, especially through my employment there. Any merging would be the IB article into the IBG article, but I can tell you that relative to IBG, IB is much more well known, and thus an article would only be re-started on it within a few months. A dab page would be quite insufficient to describe either company's different functions, and especially if the dab was for IBG; most of the company history pertains to IBG specifically. I have no doubt both drafts pass WP:GNG and are also different enough to benefit from separate articles, so I still believe that's the best course.--ɱ(talk · vbm)14:47, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, PointsofNoReturn. You have new messages at Draft talk:Drifting Sun. Message added 04:55, 14 December 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:The Trix.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:The Trix from Winx Club Season 6.png
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:The Trix from Winx Club Season 6.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Happy Holiday, whatever ones you celebrate and however you celebrate them. I see you're doing more and more HV work ... great!
One thing I would ask you to do, though, is review someone else's GA nomination now that we got Saw Mill River to that level. I've done one of the three that I usually try to do if an article I've nominated passes. You can just do one, though (and it's better if you do one from outside your usual topic areas ... stretches you a bit). People will appreciate it.
@Daniel Case: Hey. Nice to hear from you, and happy holidays too. I was reviewing Solomon Creek, the reviewer's GAN in exchange for him to review Saw Mill River. In terms of my next topic, I will probably look at improving Hudson River. Seems like one of the most important if not the most important articles in the region. We could work on it if you want. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 23:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 31
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hudson River, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Germantown, New York, Bear Mountain and Storm King Mountain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Yeah. Sorry, I've been busy with family. I'm still sifting through the article, and will be done within a few days. You are close though. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 03:05, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St
The Wikipedia training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm.
Latest comment: 9 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
Ok, so I spent a lot of time cleaning up the Hudson River today; now all it needs before submitting as a GAN is some more history and some flora/fauna information, I suppose. We could also have the Guild of Copy Editors look over it. Might work some more on it tomorrow, but feel free to add any history or flora/fauna info that you can find.--ɱ(talk · vbm)04:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. Your cleanup was a big help. With respect to GAN, however, I think this is going to take some time. The article is not nearly comprehensive enough for a river this vital. The history section will essentially need to cover the history of the Hudson Valley (could have its own article now that I think of it). Then geology on the Palisades will probably have to be added. I will also probably create an article for the history. Honestly, this rewrite could end up covering a large amount of articles. I might go see if anyone at Wikiproject Hudson Valley would like to help write any of these articles. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 04:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Most sources consider the Hudson Valley to only refer to the counties north of NYC and south of the Capital District. In terms of regions, the Hudson River passes through New York City, the Hudson Valley, the Capital District, and the North Country; thus the two histories should be quite separate. Regardless, there's a lot of history of the Valley that has absolutely no relevance to the river, and there's a lot of history related to the river that has absolutely no relevance to the Valley.--ɱ(talk · vbm)22:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
That's true. Two articles are probably needed. Your idea is good though. We can write the history section for the river (and then possibly for the Valley after), and then write the two history articles. That should work. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 00:59, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Saturday: Westchester Editathon
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You are invited to join us at Barnard College for Wikipedia Day NYC 2015, a Wikipedia celebration and mini-conference for the project's 14th birthday. In addition to the party, the event will be a participatory unconference, with plenary panels, lightning talks, and of course open space sessions.
We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.
10:00pm - 9:00 pm at Barnard College, 3009 Broadway, by W 118th St
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 21:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
Today's articles for improvement
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our inaugural evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.
We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.
After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!
7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street
Featuring a keynote talk this month on Lady Librarians & Feminist Epistemologies! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 18:28, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
Help
Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hey again. This wiki sometimes feels way too empty; the Good/Featured Topic candidates get so few people commenting that the users in charge of the process asked me to review other nominations too. I don't want my nomination to fail just because of a lack of comments, so please consider helping me again with a comment here: Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates. Thank you again.--ɱ(talk · vbm)15:50, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our next evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.
This month will also feature on our agenda: recent and upcoming editathons, the organization's Annual Meeting, and Chapter board elections.
We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.
After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!
7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street
Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 17:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
Question/clarification
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
If I may jump in, I think there should be a category for the unincorporated communities in New Jersey. I don't see any reason why the category should not exist. True the category would get larger, but if we put everything in alphabetical order, it should not be too hard to navigate. If other states like Texas, which are much bigger than New Jersey, have a category for unincorporated communities, then so should New Jersey. I would create subcategories such as list of unincorporated places in New Jersey by category in order to organize the list more, as this would limit the length of the category to a reasonable length. It may take a lot of work, but in the end it will be worth it.
For the good order, there is a category for unincorporated communities in NJ. When you say unincorporated places in New Jersey by category are you suggesting that that category should be broken down in subcategories as in unincorporated places in New Jersey by county? ThanksDjflem (talk) 15:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Djflem: Hi. Sorry for the long delay in responding to you. I think that organizing unincorporated communities by county would be a good idea, and then within the counties alphabetize the names of the communities. That would make the category easy to navigate. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 13:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Left: Czech bramboráček, a bread made of potato dough, being deep fried.
Right: The Royal Navy Trafalgar class attack submarine HMS Tireless (S88) sits on the surface of the North Pole, the northern polar ice cap on Earth
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Yes, it does, and so I have tagged it with {{advert}}. We could probably stand to delete almost everything except the lede. I haven't checked to see if we could establish third-party notability yet.
Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
How's this for teasing a lot of article out of a short stream (so short it makes the saw Mill look like the Hudson itself in comparison)? I honestly thought this one would be just a stub, but thanks to the experience of working on the other two articles I was able to get something I can propose three DYK hooks for. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Indeed. That is a pretty small stream. Great writing though to make something out of such a small stream. Are you going for GA on that article? PointsofNoReturn (talk) 18:59, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
I should probably get over there and take more pictures, at the least (probably later this summer as, between Wikimania and another trip I'm taking, I will be out of the country for almost a whole month). I'd also love to see where I can get some more numbers, such as the area of the watershed (It can't be terribly big, but I'd like a number). And find out if SLC's history includes anything about the lake's creation (just look at it on the map ... it has to be artificial). Daniel Case (talk) 21:31, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Request
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.
We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.
After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!
7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street
Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 05:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
Today's articles for improvement – discussion about changing project processes
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello PointsofNoReturn:
A discussion is occurring at Change project processes regarding potential changes to the Today's articles for improvement Wikiproject. Your input is welcomed at the discussion.
You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Brooklyn's Prospect Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck.
1pm–7pm - come by any time! @ Bartel-Pritchard Square entrance (Prospect Park West and 15th St), immediately on the lawn to your left as you walk through the lovely lotus columns.
Welcome PointsofNoReturn!
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes 
Best, ///EuroCarGT 02:04, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Saw Mill River may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give User:PointsofNoReturn/Omega Engineering a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Omega Engineering. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
