User talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

COBT

Hi Tony - it's a great article you've got at FAC there, sorry to see it renom'ed. If it's ok with you I'll have a go at addressing some of Sandy's referencing issues with the pdf I've found and linked at the FAC page. There's some additional info in there, about the artwork, which I'd like to add as well. --Joopercoopers 11:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh I forgot - the one thing we might struggle with is the assertion that it was the tallest Art-deco building outside of Manhatten. I'm not sure how to source that claim if we can't use emporis - perhaps we could move it to the talk page for now until someone can? --Joopercoopers 11:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

French Connection

someone AfDed it. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

back to the CBOTB

as you can tell, i have renewed my efforts on the CBOTB article and spent considerable time working through the suggestions from the FAC discussion by adding new text, combining text, and adding new references. i will continue this effort through the weekend, and will try my best to find a reference for the "tallest art deco building outside of manhattan". with luck and others' copy editing, i am hoping that we will pass FAC review in the next 10 days. btw....isn't it interesting that we received feedback during peer review about including the feet to meters conversion template and we are now receiving feedback that use of the conversion template is making the article messy? we'll work through it! LurkingInChicago 14:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

FAC's are always contradictory - sometimes self contradictory - you just can't please all the people..etc. I'd take the 'style' comments with a pinch of salt and do what you think is reasonable. Referencing is the main thing, the rest is people who haven't written the article, thinking they can do it by proxy. If you do get contradictory comments, best to highlight them and pose a question of the reviews which one they prefer. regards --Joopercoopers 14:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Chicago Housing Authority Police Department

Can you think of a DYK for this new article? Speciate 00:39, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Citation Request

I will add the citation for the Multi-level streets in Chicago. Actually there there are two reasons for the multi-level streets. The one I cited and that the portion of Wacker on the south bank of the main branch was done in accordance with the Plan of Chicago. But this has some limitations as the Plan only envisioned Michigan Avenue going across and not any other streets. Also, I will talk to an engineer from SOM who I worked with at Cityfront Plaza (another place with several two-level streets)and see if he knows anyplace I can get some written sources. But the street-raising above flood levels is not the reason.Gary Joseph 14:59, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Summary box

Thanks for removing the box, Tony. Are you able to resolve the remaining non-reliable sources (inventionfactory) and the factual issue (not the world's largest trading floor) so we can be done with that concern? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The "world's largest trading floor" can be resolved one of two ways: the statement could be removed (since it's no longer true), or it could be dated (was the world's largest trading floor on such-and-such date ... or once was the world's largest trading floor ... since it no longer is). I didn't remove it myself since I'm not sure how you would rather fix it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know who added it, but since it's incorrect and we have a correct reliable source, that's not really an issue. It look like Joopers got as far as s/he could, since s/he hasn't updated inventionfactory. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

DRV

Oh sorry, I hadn't noticed that one of the paragraphs higher on at my talk page had gotten a new response (it's usually easier if you add your query to the bottom). Anyway, yes, the bot has a log (to wit, its contribution history) that can be used to repopulate the cat by using the 'undo' option on those edits. HTH! >Radiant< 08:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

• As usual on Wikipedia, someone will eventually get around to it, for some value of eventually. >Radiant< 12:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah, you could contact the one who ran the bot to remove it (or check its logs) or ask for assistance anywhere, e.g. VPA. >Radiant< 08:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

CBOT

Congratulations Tony, keep banging them out - Robie House? If it's ok with you I'll keep looking for free-use images of the deco statues rather than the old BOT building ones. Take care. --Joopercoopers 22:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Nah, wading in at the eleventh hour bringing shrubberies to FAC isn't writing an FA and whoever else was involved - (Lurkingintheshadows?) :-). the credit is yours. --Joopercoopers 22:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Not to worry, Tony, whatever it is, it can be fixed. I'll go look now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I left him/her a note: I'll also manually tag the FAC as closed, even though that will mess up the bot (it's best if we leave all the steps to Gimmetrow, so he doesn't have to stop the bot). Congratulations to the Chicago crew! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Lost article finding

I've been finding Chicago-related articles and assigning them Chicago categories based on the assumption that a bot will then tag their talk pages with the project banners. Is that a good practice? I think that the bot is missing some of them. What about all the articles I found and stub-tagged a while back? Is there a way to figure out which ones of those is lacking Chicago categories? Speciate 02:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Chris Young image

Hey, TonyTheTiger. I was looking throughout the Chris Young article, and the latter picture of Young delivering a pitch (exclude the image of him batting) looks rather small. Is it in any possible if that image can be upgraded to show Chris Young more? In other words, is it possible in any way to zoom in on Chris Young for that one image? The caption says "Chris Young during deilvery", but with the current state of that particular image, it is a little difficult to actually see Young throwing the ball. Is there any way that this image could be adjusted so Young is focused on more so it could be easier for us to actually see him delivering? The proportion of the image is fine as seen from Image:20070616 Chris Young visits Wrigley (8).JPG, but when the image is shrunk to fit in the article, it's a little difficult to see him really clearly. Ksy92003(talk) 19:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not really convinced that the historical significance of Wrigley Field adds any significance to the picture. I'm not arguing against that, but I wouldn't use that as a reason as to not cropping the image. You say "the flavor of Wrigley Field would be lost." I'm sorry, but personally I fail to see how the ballpark affects the image... the image was taken of Chris Young, and I'm not convinced that the background of Wrigley Field needs to be shown. However, the image is yours, and you're free to do whatever you want with it. And although you released the image to the public domain, I don't feel that I should have any right to adjust your image. If you feel the image is good as is, then that's fine. I still hold the opinion that the image could be improved by cropping to focus more on Chris Young, but I feel that you, as the photographer, should make whatever decisions you wish for this image. Ksy92003(talk) 07:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I moved my above comment, which I quite recently posted about 3 minutes ago, to WP:FAC/Chris Young (pitcher). Ksy92003(talk) 07:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Barry Bonds

Sorry, for removing your work on the page without discuss it with you. I readd the home run list since I thought that it is vandalism. I deleted the home run watch since he hit the home run 756, and it is not that important. Also the home run watch might have violated one of the policy called WP:NOT#NEWS. Chris! _{my talk} 17:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, the home run list on the watchlist section is there before. But I don't recall seeing the walk or the intentional walk list on the watchlist. Chris! _{my talk} 17:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

My opinion is that walk or the intentional walk is not as important as the other statistic we found on the watchlist. Chris! _{my talk} 18:04, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Red linked articles

I just wanted to let you know that the previously red-linked players on Chris Young (pitcher) now have articles; I've created them recently. The pages are:

1. Homer Hillebrand
2. King Lear (baseball)
3. Dutch Meier
4. Ted Reed
5. Dutch Sterrett
6. Bobby Vaughn

If you wish, you can improve these stubs. I just wanted to let you know that you don't have to worry about the red links on Chris Young's article page, as I have created articles for all of them. Ksy92003(talk) 20:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure... I've spent a lot of time in the past couple weeks or so creating these new player articles (evidence of my user subpage User:Ksy92003/Created and the 69 articles I've listed so far. Any other articles you wish for me to create at this time? Ksy92003(talk) 20:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I can work on Eric Hillman, for sure. I don't know if I can significantly add anything for Ctrl. pitcher and Pwr. pitcher, and for the minor leaguer, I don't know where I'd be able to find anything about him. But I'll do Eric Hillman's article now. Ksy92003(talk) 18:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

As far as the Control pitcher and Power pitcher articles go, wouldn't it just be easier to include a little section on each on pitcher? I mean I can't think of much of anything different between them or between them and simply a normal pitcher, certainly not enough for a new article. Ksy92003(talk) 20:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I've created Hillman's page. I'm gonna start working on the redlinks on Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim all-time roster. If, in the midst of that, you see any other articles that require creation, let me know and I will work on them when I get the chance. Ksy92003(talk) 18:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

If you can find enough research for him, then alright. But just a section in the pitcher article would be a reasonable alternative. Ksy92003(talk) 21:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Alright. If I find that I'm able to help contribute in any way, I will gladly donate my contributions. Good luck with those articles. Ksy92003(talk) 21:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Power pitcher was recently merged to pitcher. I didn't do anything about it yet; I'll let you deal with it, as you are the creator of the articles. Control pitcher is still its own article though. Ksy92003(talk) 23:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:20070520 Lifesize Darth Vader at Lego Store.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:20070520 Lifesize Darth Vader at Lego Store.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 18:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI, prior debate started with User_talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive_11#Possibly_unfree_Image:20070520_Lifesize_Darth_Vader_at_Lego_Store.JPG. I thought this was resolved.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

(replying to message on my talk page) - Garion96 is insisting that this image is, in fact, fair use, and since it is tagged with Template:Non-free fair use in it definitely needs a rationale. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 19:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Correct, I do think the image is (part) non-free. That's why I tagged it with a non-free tag after the listing on WP:PUI, instead of deleting it. Garion96 (talk) 19:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Chris Young

At the FAC discussion, you asked for a good source about Chris Young's pitching repertoire, and I found two:

• http://www.princeton.edu/~paw/archive_new/PAW04-05/15-0608/sports.html - from the Princeton Alumni Weekly, the middle section has former Rangers' pitching coach Orel Hershiser discuss Young's mechanics, esp. his fastball.
• http://mlb.mlb.com/content/printer_friendly/sd/y2006/m05/d30/c1479620.jsp - The intro talks about his full repertoire, and at the end Mike Piazza gives more detail on his fastball's movement.

I hope this helps a bit. Cheers, Caknuck 00:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

In its present form, I don't think it's ready for FA status. I think that the season-by-season breakdown goes against the "unnecessary detail" criterion. As it stands, the article is 56K long, and he's only had four seasons in the Majors. Caknuck 19:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

That's the thing. As it is, the present 56K goes into too much detail for an FA. As his career progresses, much of the detail will have to be trimmed down to maintain focus and keep the article size from getting out of control. Because such major article revisions will be necessary, there's no way to be able to call this version of the article "stable". Caknuck 23:13, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On August 14, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article South side (Chicago), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:48, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Signature

Hey there, I've been stumbled across a number of articles you've created, moved, etc..etc... I'm kinda staying out of the discussions there for reasons that aren't necessary to bring up. I had a hard time finding the link to your talk page in your sig and thought that it might be worthwhile to mention WP:SIG to you. Just a thought, nothing major - if you would like my opinion on things, i will be glad to share them with you, but i'm not inclined to jump in on some of the topic pages. Be well. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  18:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I have been asked about my sig a few times now and have even had to shorten it when the character limit was instituted over the summer. I have never been told that the major complaint was difficulty finding my talk page before.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:03, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• I think the usability issue comes in to play. As you can see with me - i like creativity with the sigs. I just wanted you to know that people could find the sig "not useful". If you haven't checked out WP:SIG, it isn't a bad thing to do. Last you'll hear from me. Now down to the bottom of the page :-) Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Westinghouse

I'll work on it. I didn't think it was necessary to link to each individual page in basketball-reference.com, but I can fix that, if you wish. If you're referring to the "basketball powerhouse" thing, I can fix that by specifically mentioning some of the team's accomplishments (with refs, of course). Zagalejo 19:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I think you're misreading the article. It says "several," not seven. Zagalejo 19:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. I'm working on the "basketball powerhouse" thing, too. Zagalejo 19:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: opinion

Have these articles ever received consideration: Field Museum of Natural History, World's Columbian Exposition, The Jungle, and Leopold and Loeb? Also, I've noticed that Native Son and Chicago (musical) aren't even in the Chicago WikiProject. Those two should at least rank as High-importance articles. Zagalejo 19:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Wiki template for multiple wikiprojects

Hi, when you change wikiproject templates for multiple wikiprojects, can you pls use the template that allows us to see what the nested wikiprojects are, without clicking, even though they are nested? Many tx.--Epeefleche 19:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Control pitcher and Power pitcher

I see you have worked one these articles; but i also believe that these articles (both in their current state and their "potential" state) fall under scope of WP:DP. I intend to raise an AFD on them and just wanted you to know. I believe the two other articles laid out in the baseball pitcher template are identical in that respect. This might save you some time; of course, if the articles are kept then creating the new articles is certainly legitimate. You have put in some real genuine effort, so don't let this discourage you in the slightest. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

In case you are wondering, I've refractored the conversations here. I usually do this for a couple of reasons - a) it makes it easiest on the editor i'm working with to respond. b) it keeps the discussion in one place and that's a real benefit if anyone else needs to "follow whats going on". If you want to refractor this to my tp, you won't get a complaint from me.

Onto the meat, I've taken some time to look at a number of the articles and such that you've created recently. I think you've really done your best to add good content, so please don't take this as anything other than "that article just doesn't quite fit the mold". By the looks of your talk page you are clearly an accomplished editor and do some really great things. I would have loved to have incorporated the information from the various pitching articles into a main article, but again - i see the information as "opinion based" and not "encyclopedic". You and I (as i'm persuming you are a baseball fan) know darn well that nolan ryan was a "power pitcher", but that's a colloquialism that can be misleading to those not familiar with the sport. I certainly think there can be some mention of the different "strategies/styles/...." here on wiki, but it just doesn't seem to fit in this case. I've seen your recent edit to Ksy's talk page and I'm going to ask you once on the front end to not instigate things like that. These are legitimate concerns and are based on guidelines of wikipedia. You may not like my style, but i'm here to talk and here to do it in a friendly manner. Let's leave as much "personal" stuff as we can at the door. You have created a few other articles (take for example Home that i think are a just a bit off but don't need to be deleted. I would like to work with you on a discussion about merging a few of these articles. Certainly, anyone who wants to chime in is welcome. Let me know your thoughts. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  22:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to post here on your talk page, TonyTheTiger, but this is where the discussion is. You get pissed off way to easily, Jmfangio, and I know you're gonna get pissed off with this comment: the purpose of AfDs is so other people can come to discuss them. And what's the purpose of doing that if other people don't know it's been nominated for AfD? Additionally, TonyTheTiger knew it was an article that I've been interested in, and he's come to my help a couple times for these articles. So TonyTheTiger had every right to alert me of the AfD you created; you can't keep him from "instigating" things like this because he had every right to let me, someone who has been interested in editing the article you nominated, know that it was nominated for AfD. Ksy92003(talk) 23:57, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• Again you fail to recognize what my words are communicating. He had every right to inform you... but the "guess who" comment creates an uncivil environment. Coming to my talk page and titling a section "Bad faith" does nothing to help. There are a handful of you who seem very close to many sports related articles; so much so that when someone from the outside disagrees with you - their personalities are addressed. It's unfortunate because that's exactly why WP:AGF and WP:NPA exist. It's unfortunate that this collective energy can't be used more on constructive edits. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  01:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• TonyTheTiger - responded to your comment. If you want to refractor this conversation to my talk page, i'm fine with that. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  01:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Jmfangio

There is something strange going on... I went here, to your talk page, to reply to Jmfangio's comment. I was trying to explain to Jmfangio that you didn't say or do anything to make me think that he was the one who nominated that article for AfD. He said he was moving the discussion to his talk page, so I went over there to explain everything to him. You know what he said? "Please stop posting here. You are not following my points at all and I really don't care about who said what to whom and on what date. All i care about is content discussion and that people don't chime in with chirpy comments that escalate an otherwise civil process. Nuff said." So, because of Jmfangio, I feel forced to apologize for trying to defend you. Ksy92003(talk) 02:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Jmfangio has a long recent history of removing discussions from his talk page because he doesn't want to answer the questions I ask, then reports me of disruptive behavior when I'll I wanted was an answer to the question "What am I doing wrong?" I wanted to know what part of the three guidelines (WP:TPG, WP:RTP, WP:ARCHIVE) prohibited me from doing what I was doing, and do you know what he said?

Start at the top and read to the bottom. You are not familiar with any of the information there - so read it all. The WP:ANI is now in place. Goodbye. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat  04:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

So this quote proves that he is aware that he's reporting me when he knows that I don't know what I'm doing wrong, and it's proof that he repeatedly refuses to communicate effectively with other users. He's been completely disruptive towards me and has thrown off my entire pattern. He's created such a hostile environment that I don't even know if I want to edit anymore. And it's even stranger when you consider that the very first time we made contact was on Friday when he was blocked, and I noticed a bug in his "request to be unblocked" template and I repaired it. So you can see that right from the beginning, I've done nothing but try to be friendly towards him. But he says that he's the one who's gone out of his way to be polite, but clearly his judgment is clouded. He has been nothing close to that towards me, and I've been trying to be polite to him from the first time we ever made contact, the first edit I ever made to his talk page ([1]). Ksy92003(talk) 16:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I ignored your point about the RfC. I created a page for an RfC against Jmfangio, but nothing else has happened; it hasn't been approved or anything, as far as I know. Jmfangio had one against Chrisjnelson, but there hasn't been one opened against me as far as I know. Ksy92003(talk) 18:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Good articles

As I think you're already aware of, I have created articles for 99 baseball articles. I would like to try to improve some of them to Good Article status, and since you seem to be the most experienced editor out there when it comes to Good Articles and Featured Articles, I chose to come to you for advice. What should I do to improve an article, especially a small stub, to Good Article status? You can just reply here. Ksy92003(talk) 19:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you have any long time Cubs or White Sox that are WP:DYK eligible? We could work on one as part of the WP:CHICOTW. Otherwise, I will have to reveal all my secrets:-)

I really don't know. With 99 articles, I can't remember who played with what team (although almost all of them are Angels' players; that's why I created their articles). I'll try to see if there are any players who played with either the Cubs or White Sox and list them here, and hopefully you can improve them somehow. Ksy92003(talk) 19:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I've gone through 33 of the articles, and I've only found one player who played with either, Dan Briggs... it wasn't an extensive career; he played with the Cubs only in 1982 and played for four other teams the previous 7 seasons. I'm not sure if there's much you can do with so little, but if you're willing to take the challenge, then feel free. Ksy92003(talk) 19:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, here is the list of all of the players of the 99 I created that played any part of their career with either the White Sox or Cubs. Notes about players are asterisked and noted below the list.

1. Dan Briggs (Cubs, 1982)
2. Ed Correa* (White Sox, 1985)
3. Billy Cowan (Cubs, 1963-1964)
4. Brian Dorsett (Cubs, 1996)
5. Tom Egan (White Sox, 1971-1972)
6. Mike Fyhrie (Cubs, 2001)
7. Adrian Garrett (Cubs, 1970, 1973-1975)
8. Don Kirkwood (White Sox, 1977)
9. Ken Tatum (White Sox, 1974)
10. John Verhoeven (White Sox, 1977)
11. Bill Voss** (White Sox, 1965-1968)

*An article that you asked me to create due to Ivy League player, so it may be one that you would be interested in working on.

**The only player who played a majority of his seasons with a Chicago team, and only player with their colors in his infobox.

If you can do something with any of these articles, that would be great. Ksy92003(talk) 20:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The key to a good article for me has been lots of easily sourced (WP:RS, WP:V, WP:ATT) interesting facts. These guys all had more than a cup of coffee, but what I had hoped for was a player who had multiple All-Star seasons, the majority of which were in Chicago. If you read the current WP:FAC for Chris Young, you will see that the debate centers on the level of detail used to fill out the article at its given length. The level of detail that would be required for the articles you have listed would be troublesome to most. The other key for me has been that I beleive my GAs have an above average number of quality images to help the articles. It will be difficult to get any images for the articles you list. We are doubly cursed with less interesting players who we can't find pictures of. This makes the GA task a daunting one. If you look at my articles you will note that even a very interesting person like Rob Pelinka is not up for WP:GAC because he is so hard to source. I would find it hard to improve any of the articles you list to be much better than Pelinka. Young is not a product of my magic. He is a product of his own excellence that I merely put in prose. Same with Gilbert Perreault and The French Connection (hockey). Even All-Star Final Vote had many great sources and images. I can make something of an article with solid sources and good images, but I am not a magic man.

P.S. If you know of any player with multiple All-Star appearances in any sport, the majority of which were for Chicago, who has a sub 1500 character article let me know. The more recent they are the more likely we can help them.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 22:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the next thing I do in the future is create articles for Cubs and White Sox players who need them, and then let you know if any of them had significant careers for those two teams so it would be easier for you to improve them. I didn't think any of the stubs I created would be good enough because I noticed that they all didn't play that many seasons for anybody... only one I believe played more than 10 seasons. But that's why they didn't have articles to begin with. I'll try to create articles for Cubs and Sox players perhaps later tonight... I'm gonna pull an all-nighter for a bet, so I'm gonna have a lot of time tonight. Ksy92003(talk) 22:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

There are all kinds of valuable contributions that you can make to WP. Creating stubs is one of many. My advice for creating stubs would be to shoot for WP:DYK for each of them. There are three valuable contribution levels. The best stubs can get DYKed. From there develop it into a well rounded article and pursue WP:GA. This is often as much a mattter of good subject matter as good research and writing. Then from there one can pursue WP:FA. Sometimes an article will be a better list subject in which case it may not be eligible for either of the latter two. However, WP:FL is a good outlet. I think Chicago Marathon may be nominated as a WP:FLC in a few weeks. If you want to pursue GAs, I would bet that finding a bunch of guys who have had a few All-Star years and still have WP:DYK-eligible articles would be fruitful. These guys need help improving their articles. You can probably get a bunch of GAs doing this. If any of them spent most of their All-Star years in Chicago, I will help and possibly the whole WP:CHICOTW will help.—Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs) 15:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw your message here. I think the DYK's are for newly-created articles, so I was trying to find an all-star calibur player who played a majority of their career with either the White Sox or Cubs, and I haven't been able to find any yet. My editing has been disrupted because of this conflict the past several days. I'm trying to edit a lot of the football articles (you can look at my contributions list to see all that I've done) to get back into that pattern. Once I'm back to normal, I'll try to help you with any Chicago-related baseball players I can. Ksy92003(talk) 00:49, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Those are some really specific criteria. But the part about improving it five-fold or more (from less than 1,500 characters) makes it more reasonable. We'll see if I'm able to get any articles to fit that criterion, as well as have an interesting-enough fact for DYK. Ksy92003(talk) 01:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Ginobili

Thanks for your suggestions in the GAR. I have addressed some of them and hopefully with the help of another editor address the rest. There are some however I don't quite understand and you'd see them on the Ginobili talkpage -- perhaps you can clarify there when free. Chensiyuan 16:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarificatins. I believe I've addressed all your concerns, except the lead. Would work on it and let you know. Just a heads-up: I intend to use a summary style of lead, so no references would be used in the lead since they emerge later in the article. Chensiyuan 14:08, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok it's done now. Chensiyuan 14:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing and passing the article. It benefitted from your suggestions. Chensiyuan 14:51, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

A couple of the folks in the NBA wikiproject have been tremendous in pushing for GA drives frankly. Well, I'm still thinking of possible NBA player GAs to work on, so if you've got a suggestion or two I might take it up, thanks. Meanwhile, we're hoping to bring Tim Duncan up the next level, so any comments at its peer review would be appreciated too, but of course only if you're free/interested. Chensiyuan 09:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

A little update: Tim Duncan is now a FAC, any comments would be welcome here. Chensiyuan 13:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Lincoln Towing

I suppose we can. I feel there is still important information missing that I haven't been able to find but others might if it is the COTW. For instance: Date of founding and date of incorporation, which were apparently separated by at least three years. When it was incorporated, I know that Cascio added a partner, John G. Johnson, but I don't know when that happened. There's also the role LTS played in the City Council establishing laws and licenses regarding towing companies. Shsilver 18:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's give it another day.Shsilver 18:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead and change it.Shsilver 01:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Chicago Meetup

Tony, I already saw the notice about the meetup and posted my regrets. I will be out of town next weekend. I certainly hope I can catch the next one. I hope there is a nice turnout. -- DS1953 ^talk 22:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I won't be attending. Zagalejo 04:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

FBI fugitives

That article was a list and lists aren't accepted at GA. If you disagree feel free to take it to WP:GA/R. Tarret 00:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Ramón Peña

I created the article, and I'm thinking that there might be some way to make a DYK with this article with the note that his brother and nephew also have played in MLB and have had more successful careers than him. Ksy92003(talk) 17:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll start researching some of that stuff soon. Currently, I'm working on adding categories to Ricky Adams, and then I'll start looking some of that stuff up. Ksy92003(talk) 17:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I see that. I'm preparing to add a bit about the games he played in, as well as some statistics. Ksy92003(talk) 18:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I added a bit about his five-year minor league career, and the body of the article now consists over 1,700 characters. Ksy92003(talk) 18:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I would speculate that he didn't play for the DR national team because he didn't have that long nor successful of a Major League career, but it's still worth researching. I think an interesting DYK fact could be the fact that the Pirates signed him when his brother was with the organization. I'm going to add his MLB debut stats momentarily. Ksy92003(talk) 19:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you have to be the page creator and/or the main editor th submit a DYK for any particular article? If not, would you prefer to submit it instead, since you have more experience, and just allow me to see how the process works? I've seen several DYK's you've submitted in the past, but I'd like to see how somebody goes about submitting one, aside from simply creating the article, before going solo. Ksy92003(talk) 19:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. You have really helped me so much with this article, and it has really given me a good idea on how to improve other articles. Ksy92003(talk) 19:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

It's been over 3-1/2 hours since I posted the DYK submissions on the talk page, and there have bene no comments or feedback given yet. Does this meaning anything bad, or do I still just have to remain patient? Ksy92003(talk) 23:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah... okay. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Ksy92003(talk) 01:32, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

That's good. Is it possible that it may have just been overlooked? Well, it's been three days since we created the article, so if the five days passes and nothing happens with it, does it lose eligibility for DYK?

And also, can I use the "place visited" format that you "pirated from Ceyockey who burgled idea from Grutness who lifted from Moriori who half-inched from Calton who nicked it from Salsb who stole it from Guettarda who borrowed it from Coolcat" on my user page? I'll only do it if I have permission from you, for certain. Ksy92003(talk) 19:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the additions you made to the articles I created (Joe Grahe, Rich Hand, Larry Harlow (baseball)‎). I hadn't noticed that you made any edits until you mentioned them. I occasionally check Special:Recentchangeslinked/User:Ksy92003/Created to see if anybody has made any more edits.

As for the DYK, since this is my first time submitting a DYK, I'm still kinda worried, but in a good way. I'm anticipating the end result of my submission, obviously hoping that it makes the main page. So this is kinda stressing me out, probably more than it should. Again, thanks for helping me with that.

As for the "stolen" template, I will give proper credit, I can assure you of that. Ksy92003(talk) 19:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars

		The Editor's Barnstar
		This barnstar is for all your contributions in improving articles to Featured and Good Article status, as well as all the contributions you've made all throughout Wikipedia. Ksy92003(talk) 20:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

and...

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		This barnstar is for assisting me in greatly improving Ramón Peña‎ and helping me submit my first DYK and for just being an all-around good guy with all the advice you've given me. Ksy92003(talk) 20:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK-records

Hey Tony, my DYK submissions are relatively current at, [2], the GA submissions list isn't current at this time but the list of GA articles and nominations on my main user page is current, so you can follow there until I get around to updating it. (Note I haven't added the last 3 or 4 DYKs to my DYK page yet so its not quite update but basically is. IvoShandor 00:06, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The Reputation

Hey Tony. My thoughts on The Reputation article are pretty much spelled out in it's GA review. Nothing against the article itself, it just seems like the GA criteria have changed a bit since it was initially reviewed a year ago. If you have any specific concerns let me know. Drewcifer3000 17:20, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The Reputation article is actually already posted on the GA/R page (here). I forgot to post a notice to that effect on the Reputation's talk page - I'll do that right away. Also, I am definitely willing to respond to feedback concerning the process, though I actually had nothing to do with the article's content, just in bringing it to the attention of the GA/R board. Drewcifer3000 22:04, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Found a good'un

Somebody did a lot of work on Mills Novelty Company, a now defunct Chicago-based company. It has more references than you can shake a stick at. Could you please nominate it for GA or FA, whatever you see fit? Speciate 22:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Reviewed content

I don't think it matters much, but I would prefer no specific mention of newly-discoveredness at all (option 1). Those of us who discovered an article can mention it on our own pages if we want to. Speciate 02:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, what about bolding the new ones and the newly discovered ones, but keeping them in the main list? I would just list them by the date they were awarded FA or GA status, not the date we discovered them. Also, maybe list the FAs and GAs above/alongside the Chicago articles table? Move the table to the left hand side? Speciate 01:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Lincoln Towing Service

Sigh... As you returned the hidden talk space template, the article was disqualified as an eligible DYK nominee... --Camptown 14:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

But due to additional reasons... here. --Camptown 14:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

NO! I nominated this article loooong before you!! ;D The article was in the pipeline for the front page, but was removed by IvoShandor only seconds after you'd returned the template - though for new reasons... Could you come up with "neuteral" sources that the company uses satelites etc? --Camptown 15:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

We might need at least one source that the company is using satellite tracking. And the +30,000 car claim in your hook is not yet even mentioned in the article. --Cheers, Camptown 15:34, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I just removed it for the template, just hide until it isn't on the main page anymore and I will return it to next update, I put there after Camptown hid the template, I will put it back if you just hide it for the few hours its posted, I think the hook is okay, as long as it doesn't claim they are the only ones based on their website. IvoShandor 15:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Aw man, an admin just updated the template. I will prepare the next update as well, and add Lincoln Towing Service when I do. IvoShandor 15:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Tim Duncan

Hi Tony, I did the semi-automated peer review and put it into the article's talk page. When an article goes to FAC, it is removed from Peer Review, so I imagine that is what happened. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

• I also weighed in on the article's FAC page, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

I want to say thank you for doing some cleanup on Barry Bonds. I had noticed that there were a lot of repeated statistics and other stuff that needed cleaning up for a long time, and I was going to clean it up myself but when I came you had already done it. Thank you! :)* -- E2MB the museblogger 16:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

• Does this count as smiling at someone?

article priority

i listed some thoughts regarding 4 other articles on the assessment talk page. i believe all four are strong canditates for the reasons listed, but am interested to see discussion. of the others listed previously, i support union station and the jungle. since we are over 10000 WPChi tagged articles, i support increasing the number of top articles to 25-30 articles. that said, i do not support listing articles as top just to increase the number of top articles. LurkingInChicago 01:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Road to Perdition

I've given it some thought, but I'd like to explain the Themes section some more, with independent academic studies if possible. The film is still relatively new (as academic studies of films do not come out for a few years after a film's release), so I haven't been able to find much about that. However, I would like to incorporate information from the DVD commentary into the article; I've watched some of it, and there is a lot of encyclopedic detail regarding themes, cinematography, and so forth. Do you have any suggestions for the article? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually not sure about expanding the Plot section; I like to cite it as one of the tighter sections available in film articles, since consensus at WP:FILM has been leaning toward shoring up such sections. I've actually been considering creating a Wikia that could host extended summaries of films without worrying about violating #2 of WP:IINFO or WP:MOSFILMS#Plot. What detail do you feel is lacking from the Plot section? I can see if I can expand with a little more detail. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what could be cited to support the Plot section. All film articles of GA and FA status implicitly note the film itself to shape the Plot, and the section is further shaped by WP:MOSFILMS#Plot. This tends to be a subjective argument among editors about what detail is appropriate, and beyond the guideline I mentioned, there's nothing to control information about the film's story. The best Plot sections I've seen only describe the film on the surface, never making a claim that would be up for interpretation. If you have any ideas about how to address this, that would be great, but the community (both WP:FILM and Wikipedia) seem to have accepted such sections as inherently verifiable. According to WP:V, "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." With the inherent perspective of Plot information coming from the film, I'm not sure how reliable, published sources could be incorporated except to fine-tune any confusing details in the film. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Attitude

No, not particularly, I don't always agree with you, but I don't have anything against you, I have even helped out when requested. If you are referring to the review on William Powers State Rec area, I was only trying to help, any reviewer would note most of those issues. And, as I said, they are suggestions, take 'em or leave 'em as you will. If it's in reference to the template for the collaboration then I don't know what to tell you, I have disagreed with its use for months. I am content to let it go, as has been evidenced by my avoiding the issue, but if I notice it on a DYK I am going to request that it be hidden for the time the article is linked from the main page, because if we should avoid self reference anywhere, it should be the content on the main page.

If it's not about either of those things then I don't know what to tell you. Does this come up because of the comment on the collaboration talk page maybe, just trying to help again, I think it could be trimmed significantly and it might make someone visiting the page more likely to participate, again things I notice that could be improved, I don't think that constitutes an attitude problem, though, as your thread title suggests. If you would prefer, I will remove myself from the Chicago Project page and not bother you or any of your articles any longer. I was only trying to help, I notice these things because a lot of these pages (including many of the Chicago project pages and Chicago related articles are on my watchlist) are on my watchlist.IvoShandor 02:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't opppose people at RfA because I disagree with them, don't worry. IvoShandor 16:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Found another good'un

Some guys from the Opera wikiproject did a lot of work on Philip Kraus, a Chicago opera mover and shaker. It too has more references than you can shake a stick at. Could you please nominate it for GA or FA, whatever you see fit? It looks like they've stopped editing. Speciate 05:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not from the opera project; I work on the G&S project: WP:G&S. Yes, I've taken this article as far as I wish to. Some background: Philip Kraus appears to be quite full of himself and wrote the article himself. It was completely unreferenced. Then, when he was challenged, he vandalized my userpage and a bunch of pages about light opera that he had contributed self-serving information to (such as links to his commercial websites). Subsequently, an acquaintance of his (or so the person said), came along and worked with me on referencing the article. This was, all-in-all, a horrible and time-consuming experience for me, but it ultimately resulted in a pretty reasonable article. Kraus and the remaining founder of Light Opera Works appear still to be feuding in RL and attempting to cut each other out of thier various respective websites. So, thanks, but no thanks, I don't really want to get involved in a GA nomination here. -- Ssilvers 14:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Jeannette Piccard

Hi, TonyTheTiger. The article needs one or two more sources. Then all the citations formatted and the WikiProject Biography review implemented. Thanks for reminding me. September looks busy at the moment. Maybe October. -Susanlesch 22:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, DYK

Sorry, I would blame the template, but it's actually just my fault for not double checking. Here you go:

On 23 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ramón Peña, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 17:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for helping me with this DYK. Hopefully this will be a good enough experience to help me with future DYKs. Ksy92003(talk) 17:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK Criteria

For the criterion regarding an article needs to be expaned five-fold or more, does that relate to the amount of characters in the body of the article or the article size itself? Ksy92003(talk) 19:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, that was something that kinda worried me. I submitted a DYK for Felix Torres today, when I increased the body of the article over eightfold. But the overall article size was increased slightly more than fourfold, so I was thinking that might not qualify, but I submitted it just in case. Here is the DYK submission:

...that former third baseman Félix Torres, who only played three Major League seasons, was a star for Puerto Rico during the 1960 Caribbean Series, leading the tournament in home runs?

This was the best DYK submission that I saw in the article, but feel free to submit a better one if you see it. Ksy92003(talk) 22:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Hector Lopez

Don't worry; I'm expanding that section and will save my edit when I'm done with the KC section. Ksy92003(talk) 23:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I've already made some minor alterations to both charts, and I will implement the Kansas City logo momentarily, I hope. Ksy92003(talk) 16:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Champions

I don't think there's been any sort of discussion; if there has been one, I'm completely unaware of it. I believe I've seen some occurances of the '05 White Sox championship roster around, but nothing more than that, as far as I'm aware. Since baseball teams have 25 players, and basketball teams have 12, it would take up twice the space, which would be super long for teams like the Dodgers and Yankees. It doesn't hurt to post a question about it, I suppose. Ksy92003(talk) 01:09, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm aware of the collapsability, but even with them all collapsed, if they were all added to New York Yankees for all their championships, that would more than fill up the entire browser and then some, even if they were all collapsed. Ksy92003(talk) 01:14, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I forgot that some of the articles collapse all the collapsable boxes into one, in which case would solve the issue of clogging up the entire browser. I see that you've alreayd posted a question about this on the project page. Let's see if we decide to create the templates and then we can have the discussion about how to display them.

For the record, in a span of five minutes, I've received five messages, which is a clear record for me. Ksy92003(talk) 01:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Needs-photo

At one time there was a page that listed all WP:Chi talk pages marked as needing a photo. Where did it go? Speciate 01:31, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Redlinks/Infoboxes

Alright, I'll get on them ASAP. I've just got some other business to attend to, and then I'll begin working on those. Ksy92003(talk) 16:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, Lopez played a good deal of time in the Majors (12 seasons), so there is a lot that can be said about him. The fact he was the third outfielder, alongside Maris and Mantle, two great historic Yankee legends, gives him a vast expansion of notoriety as the third string for two exceptional talents, the first regular-starter who is Panamanian-botn, so that's huge history for him and all Panamanian players, so there are clearly a lot of things that can be said about him, and I'm quite confident that it can be improved to GA status, which would be a first for me. I'm surprised this article was a stub to begin with, as well.

If there aren't any objections to championship templates (which I don't suspect there will be), I wouldn't really know how to begin. I guess we'll just take one of the templates for the White Sox and change the players' names, and I assume we can get the players' names from Baseball-reference.com. Ksy92003(talk) 17:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Baseball templates

It's actually not complete because I could not find exact info. I was actually able to find an entire 1995 season Braves roster, but I had to use World Series stats to determine who was on the series roster. So if anyone didn't play, they aren't on there because I'm not aware of them. I'd also check out Template:Angels, I think they did a good job with that one.►Chris Nelson 17:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah you're right, I thought that as soon as I posted it.►Chris Nelson 17:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure. But where is the example I should follow for creating the template? For some reason, I can't find it. Ksy92003(talk) 17:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Jody Wagner

Thank you for your reply to my comments on the WikiProject Chicago Talk page regarding Virginia Secretary of Finance Jody Wagner. I was curious to know why WikiProject Chicago would take an interest in a Virginia politician whose only ties to the Chicago area was her attendance at Northwestern University. Although I still believe her connections to Chicago are tenuous, I do not object to her inclusion in WikiProject Chicago if WikiProject members feel that she meets the criteria for inclusion. --TommyBoy 22:59, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Chicago Area Wikipedians Meetup

Thank you for hosting the Chicago Wikipedia Meetup! It was great meeting fellow contributors.—Cnadolski 03:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Team logos/Player articles

Hey, TonyTheTiger. In regards to Chris Young and Hector Lopez, Soxrock (talk · contribs) has told me that it is against Wikipedia's Fair Use policy to use team logos in the player articles. I'm not exactly sure why, but he has told me this, and this was a minor issue back in April when we were developing the season articles; we had to remove the team logos from the articles because they are only allowed on the articles for the respective teams. Soxrock didn't remove them because he wanted me to be aware of it first, and I didn't remove them because I wanted you to be aware of it, as well. But I think we should remove the logos from Chris Young, Hector Lopez, and Barry Bonds, per the Fair Use policy. Ksy92003(talk) 16:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It's basically because we're only allowed to use logos to illustrate that organization. Having them on player pages is basically "decoration."►Chris Nelson 16:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was about to get to that. The only reason we're allowed to use the logos anyway is to help describe the team. As logos are symbols for those teams, they are quite important on the teams' articles because they help describe them. Using the logos in the players' articles don't help describe the players, so we can't use them. Chrisjnelson is right; this is mainly decoration. Ksy92003(talk) 16:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't have any sort of such program. I've got to do it all manually. Anyway, as far as the colors, I think there is some page that has all the team colors, but I don't remember where. What I just do is go to somebody's page and pirate the colors from their page. For example, I go to Magglio Ordonez to get the Tigers' colors, Derek Jeter to get the Angels' colors, etc. Ksy92003(talk) 17:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure; I'll do their colors momentarily. Ksy92003(talk) 17:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't quite understand your question. However, if you're talking about "extracting" colors from official logos, use this: Instant EyeDropper. This allows you to click anywhere on your computer (say you have Yankees.MLB.com up, for instance) and it gives you the hex code for that color. This is what we did with all the NFL roster templates and stuff. It's a good tool. Hope this helps, if I misunderstood you let me know.►Chris Nelson 19:50, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry man, I really have no idea.►Chris Nelson 17:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Chicago meetup and Ogg

Hi Tony, it was good to meet you and the other guys yesterday--I was disappointed that I couldn't stay longer. There are a lot of ways to read or encode ogg. I use the quicktime components for reading—I think that this would also allow me to encode in ogg if I have the pro version of quicktime, but I don't have much experience of encoding video. —Jeremy (talk) 23:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Héctor López

On 27 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Héctor López, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Champion rosters

I created {{1961 New York Yankees}} and {{1962 New York Yankees}} and added them to all the players' articles. Now, these templates don't have the player numbers because, well, I was too lazy to try to find them, but that's a task to conquer at another time. Just a heads up on what I've done so far. I'm now gonna go create {{2002 Anaheim Angels}} and add those, and as I'm an Angel fan and went to the deciding 7th game of the 2002 World Series, I should be able to recall most of the jersey numbers. Ksy92003(talk) 18:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

When you talk about the banners, are you referring to the Champion Roster templates or the DYKs? Ksy92003(talk) 18:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Sorry for the confusion.

On the DYK topic, the Felix Torres DYK was added when I was asleep. After I woke up, I saw it on the Main Page, and after a few minutes, it was replaced by the new version, the one that currently has the Hector Lopez DYK. So it was kinda weird because I had submitted a DYK and almost wasn't even able to see it. Ksy92003(talk) 18:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Of the three DYKs that I helped out with, this was the first that I did almost entirely by myself. In fact, 99.3% of the data that is currently in that article was stuff that I contributed. You and Waacstats (talk · contribs) were the other two contributors, and Waacstats' contribution was stub-sorting, and the stub was removed by myself after I substantially expanded it. So this DYK is actually a big confidence boost in that I now know that I can do this kind of stuff all by myself.

Out of curiosity, do you have any place where you display all your successful DYK submissions? Ksy92003(talk) 19:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK credits

If an article's been created collaboratively, generally the top two or three will get a {{UpdatedDYK}}, provided the nominator singles them out. The {{UpdatedDYKNom}} goes to the person who wrote the hook. If someone started the article as a stub, usually only those responsible for the expansion will get credit templates. It costs nothing to add the thank you templates, so it's always better to give one than not if there's doubt :) GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 20:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

They're fairly unofficial, it's left up to the recipients to organise their retention, though if one's been missed a note to the template updater rarely goes awry. I've added the credit template now. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 20:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Potential GAC

The article looks good now. Per Talk:Héctor López, I added Persondata at the bottom of the article; read Wikipedia:Persondata for instructions on how to view it if you can't already). Keep me updated on the GAC status. Ksy92003(talk) 20:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK August 27

On 27 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chicago Race Riot of 1919, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 23:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Assessments

Just want to let you know Tony, I am still assessing chicago articles as I am going along and doing Illinois. I don't know if you have anyone that would want to rate both Illinois and Chicago articles maybe through AWB, but I am more than willing to take the assistance. Also, Illinois now has importance, so you should start seeing that pop up now. Just giving you an FYI.--Kranar drogin 23:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK Medal

		The DYK Medal
		I IvoShandor award this DYK Medal to TonyTheTiger for outstanding contributions to WP:DYK concerning Chicago related articles. Just so you know, the answer to your earlier query was me. ;) IvoShandor 23:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Two project banners?

One talk pages, it is possible to type either "WikiProject Chicago" or "ChicagoWikiProject" (with the curly brackets, of course) and see a banner. Is one of these being ignored by the bot(s)? Speciate 06:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Grunt work

Is their any chance of getting a bot to make all remaining unassessed WP:CHI banners "Low" importance? The reason I ask is I have combed through most of the unassesseds and have only been assessing articles I view as "Mid" or above. I'm sure the remainder are about 95%+ Lows, and so it would be easier to just adjudicate those few non-Lows as we come across them. Speciate 06:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

In a sense, I have assessed all the remaining articles as "Low" importance. I monitor newly created Chicago-related pages, and assess any of them that I think are "Mid" importance or higher on the spot. Also, I have methodically looked at all the unassessed pages by title, and assessed any of them that I think are "Mid" importance or higher. No human is ever going to have the time to enter "|importance=Low" into 7,266 talk pages. Another reason to have a bot do it, (and I only want a bot to do it once) is so that articles created afterwards will show up as unassessed. A tiny fraction of the unassessed articles might be higher than "Low", but assessing them "incorrectly" will not harm the project. At worst, a few people might complain, and then we will know if somebody cares about the page, and can easily reassess those few pages. Speciate 23:14, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Stubs removed during AWB stub sort

When using stub tags, you want to try to use as specific of a tag as possible. For example, you wouldn't want to use {{Illinois-stub}}, when {{Chicago-stub}} is more specific. The important points in that article are: Chicago, theatre, and struct [i.e. a building]. As such, the two tags that I left on the article cover all of those points. The other two were simply redundant. I hope that helps explain it. If you have any more questions, just let me know. Have a great day and happy editing! ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 14:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Here's some more information: WP:STUB#Categorizing_stubs Also, {{theat-struct-stub}} was deleted in favor of {{theater-struct-stub}} and {{theatre-struct-stub}}. The category still remains at Category:Theatre (structure) stubs. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 15:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

By that logic, you could put {{stub}} on every article. The whole point of stub-sorting is to find the most specific tag to put on an article. Since Category:Chicago stubs is a sub-category of Category:Illinois stubs, simply using {{Chicago-stub}} would be preferred. In any case, they are no real hard and fast rules, so feel free to put more templates. It just seems like over-kill to me. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 16:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I believe {{US-theat-stub}} and {{theatre-struct-stub}} are completely different. US-theat is more about theatre in general, while theat-struct is about a specific building. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 16:14, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that would be wise. The article is about a specific building, so US-theat is not the right stub. As you can read from theatre: This article is about the field of performing arts. For the structure theatre is performed in, see theatre (structure). ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 16:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

Hey there TonyTheTiger. Okay regarding the article, take the time you need. I will give you 9 days instead of the typical 7. See WP:IAR. Can't wait to see it finished. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (tαlk) 22:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

"People from" cat

I was the one adding the "class=B" to those articles that already had a WP:Chi banner, and had been assessed as "B" by some other wikiproject. I didn't look at the page at all to gauge the legitimacy of their categorization. Speciate 23:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Deval Patrick spent his childhood on the South Side, that counts as "from" Chicago, right? Speciate 23:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I overlooked a few of those as Mid, sorry. And you're right, Sullivan should be High. Speciate 23:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I was kind of hoping you guys would notice all those articles I found, but I guess I should have assessed them completely. Speciate 00:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Patrick Nash

Created, but probably won't be able to put in time until tomorrow. Go ahead. Shsilver 01:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you help me out?

Hi! I noticed that you put up a picture for the Ford/Oriental Theatre. I've been trying to add more information on articles relating to theatre in Chicago, but I can't figure out how to put up pictures on the articles I've been editing and some of the articles have no photos at all. I thought that I was giving the correct citation information but obviously I'm doing something wrong. I loved the one that you put up for the Oriental and was wondering if you could help me out. Let me know! Thanks! Julia1287 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Julia1287 (talk • contribs) 21:22, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Clarification

Sorry that I was unclear. I have been trying to cite pictures that I took from Broadway in Chicago's website but I think that I have been citing them incorrectly. However, I simply may not have all the information necessary to cite them correctly. In this case I suppose I would need to take an original picture. So if it is possible to cite the pictures off of the website I just need to understand how to correctly cite the image. If that is not possible then I could go and take a picture myself but I still need to be sure of how to cite it correctly. Is there a way you could help me with this? Julia1287 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Julia1287 (talk • contribs) 21:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Ahh, yes... taking my own pictures will be easier. Thank you very much. Julia1287 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Julia1287 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Weak Oppose

I'll consider reconsidering. -Lemonflash_{(do something)} 23:49, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

RE: Portals

I don't know, but it looks more like most portals easily get Featured status. Illinois did. Speciate 05:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA

I have posted an optional question on your RfA, take your time with it, analyze what I have provided there and then state your opinion. Note I am neutral now, but leaning on support. And I hold none of our disputes against you, those are content related and do not affect my opinion. Obviously, you are an asset to the project. So, again, I smile. : )

IvoShandor has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

IvoShandor 08:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: voting and ogg

Hi Tony. No, I did not produce the ogg file at Sheffield. I think that it was someone at Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia--they link to Wikipedia:Media#Audio for information on the ogg format. I have been planning to try to record an article myself (probably History of Sheffield), but so far I haven't got round to it. My three votes at WP:CHICAGO were because I didn't see a fourth article that I thought fitted the bill—is a 'none of the above' vote allowed? Thanks, —Jeremy (talk) 13:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Response to RFA Q10

Thank you for the detailed response to my question. I personally find it confusing to phrase the question as Does consensus apply to talk pages?, because the answer is undoubtedly "yes". I think a clearer formulation is Does the 'consensus' of one group of editors override the 'consensus' of another?, in which case the answer hinges on interpretation of policy.

In this particular case, I find the attempt to keep the project banner off of the article's talk page inappropriate. After all, it's just a project banner ... it's presence does little or no harm. In general, I think project banners should be removed only when they are clearly inappropriate (e.g. adding {{AfricaProject}} to Talk:Maine) or highly controversial/libelous (e.g. adding {{WP Criminal}} to Talk:Tony Blair).

Although I still view your response to PMAnderson, particularly the references to the KKK and lynch mobs, to be inappropriate and unconstructive, I also gather the impression that it was a one-time incident. Anyway, I'll take a few days to mull over my comments and your responses to them; absent any new developments, I will likely switch to 'neutral'. Thank you again for your prompt and detailed responses to my inquiries. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk:Black Falcon#Consensus

It applies in the sense that there is general consensus about the types of actions/behaviours that are (not) appropriate on talk pages, mostly as reflected through Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. For instance: comments should be focused primarily toward improvement of article content, discussions should be archived instead of deleted, comments should (when possible) be in English so as to be comprehensible to all, comments should not be personal attacks, and so on. Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)