User talk:FFM784/Archive 1

Archive 1

Help with Edit Request, RMS Titanic page

Dear user FFM787, I'm contacting you here because you are the most recent user to visit the RMS Titanic page, who seems to have editing rights. I don't have a wikipedia account, but I do have a professional interest in the art and artists of the 18th and early 19th centuries. I couldn't help noticing that the 'Mail and Cargo' section of the Titanic page fails to mention the most famous and single most expensive item of either passenger luggage or cargo to be lost during the disaster - a very large neoclassical painting by the French painter Merry-Joseph Blondel, for which the sum of $100,000 was claimed in compensation ($2.4 million equivalent today). I have typed a sentence or two which I hope you will consider good enough to slot straight into the article, which I have left on the 'talk' page of the Titanic article, though it hasn't been attended to yet. I wonder if you could help? I have also included a reference to the New York times article which confirms the claim. It would be most useful to me to have this edit included, as I am organising a Blondel exhibition in Paris this autumn and would like to have a section of the exhibition dedicated to this lost painting. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.161.139.224 (talk) 06:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

My only interest in the RMS Titanic article was to update the overly long list of External Links. I suggest that you contact one of the users with more interest than I in the content of this article. To locate such a user follow these steps:

Click: "View History", then "Revision history statistics", then scroll down to the list of Top Editors.

Alternatively you should create an account on Wikipedia and start making edit. As some stage you will then become an Autoconfirmed User. FFM784 (talk) 16:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Holyoke Railroad Station

Nice job on the article; however, I don't think it needs to be separate from the Connecticut River Railroad Station. Generally when a railroad station is replaced in the same town - especially here, where the new station is just a block away from the old one - it's reasonable to combine the articles to present a more complete history of rail transport in the town. For example, Wareham Train Station wouldn't make sense to make a new article because they're building a new platform nearby; keeping everything together presents a logical flow of information. (There are a few exceptions; Hyannis is one because both downtown stations are actively used.) If you're okay with it (as the only major author of the new article) then I'll go ahead and merge the two articles. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Go ahead and combine the two articles. I would suggest though that you keep "Holyoke Railroad Station" as the title of the main article and that the information related to the Connecticut River RR Station should be in incorporated under it. The CT River RR station hasn't operated under this name for many many years and going forward I would expect that the majority of people will be much more interested in information about the new Holyoke station rather than the old one.

FFM784 (talk) 02:53, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

And done. Cleanup might take me a few days, but the basic stuff is there, and ktr101 created the commons category. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Norwottuck Rail Trail

Horses and motor vehicles are now allowed? - Denimadept (talk) 01:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I removed the "no motor vehicles or horses" wording since by its very nature a "rail trial" is defined as a multi-use path which is commonly used for walking, running and biking, as well as some other uses such as in-line skating. Since all of the wiki rail trail pages that I have seen only list what is permitted I thought this would be fine here too. (i.e. there is no parameter in this infobox for what is not allowed.)FFM784 (talk) 01:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Tunnel Bar in NoHo

Do you think it would be possible to get a photo of the Tunnel Bar in Noho, as I am thinking that it might not be a bad addition to the NoHo article or adding it to an article on a similar topic. If not, I can always get one when I'm visiting friends at UMass in the near future. Other than that, is there any track work on the Cape that you want documented, as I am very close to most of the line and would have no problem getting some shots. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure Kevin. I'll try to take a few pictures of the bar in the next week or so. As far as the Cape goes -- I think it would be useful to have a shot of the expanded high-level platform in Hyannis at the HTC and the location of the proposed Bourne stop, under the bridge. They might be a nice additions to the CapeFlyer article. Ben FFM784 (talk) 23:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I actually took a photo of the Hyannis platform, which I just uploaded here, and have a photo of the Bourne area, although it is right across the canal and is of poor quality so I can get one soon. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:59, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Nice shot of the extended platform in Hyannis. To bad they didn't extend the platform in the other direction too. FFM784 (talk) 17:45, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, the only work done there was to cut off part of the track located near the center so that it doesn't continue into the line that goes to the old station, so I suppose they could extend the station a bit, especially since they also chewed out a bit of the hillside at the same time. I suppose I could go check it out later today and report back to you, so I will let you know what is going on down there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:41, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

No rush checking out the platform at the HTC. I just thought of a few more locations that could use pictures at some stage - the transfer stations and the last active freight siding on the Cape at the power plant in Sagamore. I'm sure that there are remnants of a few stations around that could be photographed too, like in Sagamore. (you can see the foundation of the old station on Google Maps.) FFM784 (talk) 20:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

A couple notes

Hey, you've been doing good work on all the western Mass articles. However, there's a couple things you should know.

First, if you're performing a page split or merge that might be questioned at all, it's best to seek input before doing so. For a relatively minor page like the Conn River Line with few editors, it's probably enough to just ask anyone who's made heavy edits recently (plus perhaps the page creator if they're still active). For a more active page, or one where there's disagreement about the proposed change, then a proper discussion and notifying relevant wikiprojects may be in order. In this case, since you probably know more about it than anyone else, I'm trusting your judgement.

>Duly noted. Next time I think any page should be split I'll propose the change first on the Talk section before taking such a step.

We should discuss what content goes on what page - it sounds like the Connecticut River Railroad page should be a history of companies - when lines were built and abandoned, and when the CRR acquired other railroads and was acquired by thhe B&M - that basically ends with the 1893 acquisition except with perhaps a few lines about what became of the various segments.

>Yes, I agree fully. In my view the CRRR article should basically just be about the former railroad company, as you said.

The Connecticut River Line page, on the other hand, should focus just on the Springfield-East Northfield mainline. That'll include everything about when it was built, who owned it, and what services operated over it (right up to the Vermonter reroute, and the section I have drafted about the proposals for commuter service.)

>Agree with all of this too. A lot of important information needs to be added, inc. more information about MassDOTs acquistion of the line, proposals for expanded service and some information about the current freight operation. If I can find a citation I might also add something about the little talked about Montrealer derailment that occurred in Hatfield during the early 1980s.

Second, a minor point. When one article redirects to another, you don't have to take the time to fix the link to bypass the redirect. [[Connecticut River Line|Conn River Line]] and [[Conn River Line]] function exactly the same.

>Okay. Didn't know that.

Third, another minor point. If you discuss or link to another page in the body of an article, it probably doesn't need to be under See Also as well. Conn River Line is already linked from the lede and body of the stations on it; it just takes up space to be in a see also as well.

>I thought this might be the case but I added it since the two articles are so closely related. Take it out if it doesn't belong there.

Please don't take these as criticism - you're doing some great work, and I'm incredibly grateful for your pictures as well. I'll be able to get opening day pictures at Greenfield (SB) and Northampton (NB) plus perhaps Springfield and Holyoke, but I'm too far away to get pictures regularly of the progress. Cheers! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:22, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

>No problem at all. I very much appreciate the feedback and comments. I plan on taking pictures of Day One in Northampton, both SB and ND, and then take a round trip ride on Tuesday (Greenfield-Springfield and return). In Northampton look for the guy with the Canon G11 camera.FFM784 (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good to all. You're one of my favorite editors to work with - you've got a very good sense of how to organize information. I'll do work on the CRRR and CRL articles when I've got a chance, including KML maps and commons categories as well as article prose. I'll see you tomorrow at Noho! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:46, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

A related note about a couple of the see also links I just removed. The Hartford Line serves the New Haven - Hartford - Springfield corridor; it won't have anything to do with the Conn River Line corridor. The NNEC, like most of the 2004-designated corridors, is no longer under planning as such. They've been replaced by state-planned corridors like the Northern New England Intercity Rail Initiative., which is already discussed in the text. I moved union station to the text in Northampton; it's more useful there than as an EL. Good catch with the Hokyoke station name, by the way! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:55, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay on the deletions, but it would seem to me that my addition of the Hartford Line link was in line with this text in the Manual of Style, "The links in the 'See also' section might be only indirectly related to the topic of the article because one purpose of 'See also' links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics." WP:ALSO FFM784 (talk) 02:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Hartford Line

Great work with the stations. Just a note - North Haven, Newington, and Enfield aren't currently funded for build (some of them got design money the other day) so they won't be open for the 2016 start of service. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:01, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry about that. I was moving along a little too fast I guess. Will revert my earlier changes to these 3 stations in a moment.FFM784 (talk) 03:05, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Haha, no worries. They were supposed to be part of the initial build, but the trackwork got funded before the stations did. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:36, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Green Mountain Railroad

How can you say that the link to the Green Mountain Railroad isn't relevant to the article on Bellows Falls (Amtrak station)? The railroad has a direct line to the station, which is also their official headquarters. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 18:59, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I just had a closer look at the web site for the Green Mountain Railroad. There is no indication on this site that the railroads HQ is located in Bellows Falls. The web site says that the contact address is in Burlington. I looked at the 2014 schedule on the site and it says that all of their passenger train runs out of Burlington and Chester. In my view the link is not directly related to this particular Wikipedia article because no Green Mountain Railroad trains stop at this station and there is no indication, that I have seen, that suggests that they HQ is in fact at the Bellows Falls station. If this station becomes a stop in 2015 then the article of course should be updated. If you have other information please pass it along. Thanks.FFM784 (talk) 22:42, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. Maybe they moved their HQ. Try some of the images at this link, as well as the ones at White River Junction. I also noticed you removed the links to the "Bridge Line Historical Society." Not that I'm criticizing you for doing it, I just think it sucks that the website had to die (who says the internet is forever?). ---------User:DanTD (talk) 23:07, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I suspect that they moved their official office to Burlington "recently". Probably was done at the end of the 2013 season (just a guess). I'm not familiar with the former Bride Line Historical Society web site. Was it a good site? If yes then it might be worth wild to link to the archived version of the site (if available) on the Internet Archive's "Way Back Machine" (https://archive.org/web/) (nothing ever dies on the Internet...)FFM784 (talk) 23:21, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I tried looking it up in Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. It never showed up. Some sites even they can't keep alive. As for Green Mountain Railroad, those links show they clearly had stops at Bellows Falls and White River Junction. Archive[dot]org, did have an old link to the White River Flyer, but it's not in the best shape. I vaguely remember something about the White River Flyer being discontinued. At this point, the most I think that can be done is mentioning the fact that those trains used to go to these stations. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 01:02, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

UPDATE: Look what I found; Not one, not two, but three links showing the heritage, ownership, and non-Amtrak use of Bellows Falls station. There's a bit of conflicting info in some of them, but all seem to agree on the GMRC's connection there. I try to look up White River Junction later on this morning. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 13:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Here's a link to a collection of archived copies of the Bridge Line Historical Society's web site on the WayBack Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20141001000000*/http://bridge-line.org/ and here's a link to a collection of archived copies of the Green Mountain Railroad's web site: https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.rails-vt.com/ I'm sure there is some good information that can be pulled from these links that could be used to update the Wikipedia page for this station. FFM784 (talk) 16:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I tried loading the Bridge Line Historical Society, and I got a total blank. The existing Green Mountain Railroad site doesn't even need the WayBack Machine, but older versions of the site do. This was all I was able to get when I tried to revive the Green Mountain Flyer and this was what I was able to get when I tried to restore the White River Flyer. I'll see what I can do about restoring the other links. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 00:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

NY time and weather, apologies

Apologies, I thought it only gave the time and weather.SoSivr (talk) 17:53, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

No worries.FFM784 (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Northampton, Massachusetts

FFM784 Tried to make more precise statement about LGBTQ community with sources. Am not sure who posted the edited you reverted (it was not me) but I felt the point they were trying to make was right, but I agreed with you it was not sourced. Nor did I feel it was precise. Therefore made changes shown.WindingRoad (talk) 04:24, 3 March 2015 (UTC)WindingRoad

You did a nice job with your recent edits and the selection of sources. The wording is much more precise now. Thank you.FFM784 (talk) 13:28, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Iliza Shlesinger

Why in the world did you undo my edit that stated that Iliza Shlesinger keeps her relationships private? Other artists have the same info on their pages. Example: Eddie Izzard Saying that she keeps her relationships private is hardly "tabloid" material.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfdemt (talk • contribs) 23:47, March 19, 2015

I just looked at this a little more and I cannot find any indication on her web site that she said this. (I used Advanced Google Search to search just her web site.) It could also be argued that this is information is not really encyclopedic information per Wikipedia's standards, but I'll let someone else argue this point. Please add a new citation for this sentence that proves that she said this. Thanks. FFM784 (talk) 11:34, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Please do not delete "dead" links

@FFM784: re: this edit of yours[1], where you deleted the URL of a "dead" link. WP:Dead link states "Do not merely delete cited information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer.", and then goes on to explain why. I suggest you review that how-to. I found the new URL by doing a DuckDuckGo search with the website of the URL, and the text of the "|title=". This technique turns up a lot of fixed links. Took me longer to write this suggestion to you, than to fix the "dead" link, partly due to my checking today's edits (searching back through an article's history for the deleted URL, can take a long time). Thank you — Lentower (talk) 00:43, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

My apologies for my mistake. I won't do this again.FFM784 (talk) 17:32, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Great! BTW, I think of them as ^{[comatose links]} in need of resurrection. — Lentower (talk) 21:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

North Station and categories on Commons

Hey, you've been uploading some great old postcards to Commons. Are you a collector? I do have a couple things to note. First, you've left superfluous categories on a few of them; see for example this edit where I removed two categories that the parent category of Greenfield (B&M station) was already in. It's not a big deal, but please do check that you're only using the most specific categories.

Second, you just made this edit to North Station, and I'm not sure why. The article is currently about the entire North Station transportation complex, including the rapid transit lines. (I'd be amenable to discussion of separating the subway station from the commuter rail station, but that does come with the consequence of having to check a large number of links after the split.) So it's not unreasonable to have an old image of one of the elevated stations, though I think this image of the Green Line station is probably more illustrative. I'm concerned about the postcard image you added; while it's a great old postcard, it's totally inaccurate. The postcard artist widened Causeway Street into a gigantic parking lot and completely removed the Causeway Street Elevated. If that's the only free image of the 1928 station available then that's what we'll have to use, but I'm concerned about using a view known to be incorrect. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:22, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I do have a small collection of postcards that I am slowly adding to Commons.

Categories: My apologies for any errors that I've made with the categorization of images. I will review all of my contributions to Commons in the next week or so and clean them up, as needed.

North Station image deletions: I removed the two images from this article because I did not think that they were very helpful in the overall context of the history section of the article as it is currently written. In some ways they just seemed like almost random images of the station area since there is no/limited context in the article. Please re-add them if you think they're important.

I don't see any reason to split the North Station article into two.

I was not aware that the old postcard image of North Station that I added was factually incorrect. Postcards from this era are often based on a photograph so it did not even occur to me that the depiction of the station area might be wrong. If it is an incorrect depiction of the station at that time then it should be removed from the article. In this case I will locate another image.

Please keep your comments coming. As I'm sure that you are aware there is a very step learning curve to master the ins and outs of editing on Wikipedia and I am happy to get all the help I can get.FFM784 (talk) 22:30, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, please don't take my comments too harshly either. You're becoming a skilled editor very fast; both quality prose and technical editing is a rare combination, and your knowledge of western and southeastern Massachusetts fills in a lot of territory that I'm still learning. Always very happy to collaborate with you.

Old postcards are usually fairly accurate - while a few details may be cleaned up, they're fairly reliable as it goes. I believe the North Station postcard is an exception because it would have been impossible to get a good view of it with the narrowness of Causeway Street. It may still be of useful illustrative value with the proper caption; because it opened after 1923, good images of that incarnation of North Station are hard to find. (Same, too, goes for the 1975-built North Station on the Orange Line before it was substantially modified with the coming of the Green Line).

The rationale behind splitting the article is to (as I've mentioned before in discussions with you, though in very different contexts) is to segregate like with like, and unlike with unlike. For most station locations, it makes sense to keep different iterations of a station in the same article - for example, the different iterations of Back Bay station (and Trinity Place etc) make sense entirely as a linear history, including the addition of the Orange Line in 1987. (It's also tucked inside the middle of the station.) Same with Forest Hills, or the succession of stations in Noho, or the commuter rail stations located where Wellington is now. With North Station and South Station - uniquely among stations in Massachusetts, honestly - the mainline terminals were totally separate from the rapid transit stations, and it's actually easier to consider their history as two separate articles. That lets you talk about all the weirdnesses of the elevated stations and underground stations and the Green line surface station and such, and not get bogged down in when long-distance services stopped. And vice versa. It also makes images make more sense because they're more directly relevant - elevated images stay with the rapid transit information, and your postcards views and my sixth-platform-stub images stay with the mainline terminal.Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:09, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

NYT permalink

Re this, I've never seen that technique used before. What is the benefit, other than saving a few characters? Is this something provided by Wikipedia or by the NYT? Is it documented somewhere, either here or there? Thanks. ―Mandruss ☎ 01:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

See WP:ELDEAD. A permalink is a URL that will remain unchanged indifferently. The permalink URL that I used in this case came from the New York Times website. To get the permalink URL I just selected "more" in the list of options that appears on the left-hand side at the top of the article. Wikipedia suffers a lot, in my view, from the problems associated with link rot. Linking to a permalink will remove the chance that this article becomes unavailable in the future.FFM784 (talk) 15:24, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm aware of the link rot problem, but I wasn't aware of any solution besides complete citations and the use of archive. Good to know for NYT, since I use it a lot in citations. In my experience the main link rot at NYT is in articles pulled from the wire services, which seem to go away after a month or two. Do you know whether those articles will remain accessible indefinitely via the permalink? (If they don't, I don't know why the permalink option would be offered for them in the first place, as in this example, but it could be just a software limitation.) Also I'm wondering which other sites offer similar permalinks, and how to get them. ―Mandruss ☎ 02:15, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

And finally: Like many news sites, NYT often updates articles after their initial creation, under the same URL. Do you know whether each revision gets its own permalink and remains accessible as that revision? (Similar to the way Wikipedia permalinks work) ―Mandruss ☎ 02:37, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

The NYTs is the only website that I have come across that offers permalinks. I wish more did because link rot is a major problem and it seems that most people who run websites do not think (or care) about the longevity of the URL addresses associated with their postings. I'm fairly certain that permalinks on the NYTs website will remain available indefinably as part of the NYTs archive, per [2], which oddly is the last time the Times has addressed the topic of permalinks on their site. (The topic is not even part of the customer service Q&A section). I've just sent a list of questions to the Times to see if I can get answers to the other questions that you asked, since I to would like to know the answer. Please stand by. FFM784 (talk) 15:35, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

<ref name=NYTimes.Feds>{{cite web |first=Holbrook |last=Mohr |first2=David A. |last2=Lieb |title=Feds: Evidence Backs Ferguson Officer's Account in Shooting |date=March 4, 2015 |accessdate=March 9, 2015 |website=The New York Times |agency=Associated Press |url=http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/03/04/us/ap-us-ferguson-shooting-report.html |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150403031435/http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/03/04/us/ap-us-ferguson-shooting-report.html |archivedate=April 3, 2015 |deadurl=no}}</ref>
Converting to permalinks, I ran across the above case of an AP article that is no longer available. NYT search for the title returns nothing. The archive.org link doesn't work either, so I guess this one is lost forever. The question remains whether we could still get to it if we had the permalink for it, but I suspect the answer is no (copyright issue?). Hopefully NYT will answer the question definitively. If the answer is no, we should avoid using wire service articles at NYT—archive.org almost never works with NYT, apparently due to their paywall design. ―Mandruss ☎ 10:18, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Well the archive.org link worked on a second attempt, but the other three archive versions don't. So it's sporadic at best, failing for 3 out of 4 cases, and I'd prefer to avoid archive.org for NYT whenever I can. ―Mandruss ☎ 11:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Cape Main Line

Cape Main Line is mentioned in CapeFlyer as being owned by the MassDOT, but I'm not sure what the trackage is now. I think there should be a redirect to something, even if it is the historic Cape Cod Railroad who built the original line or Cape Cod Central Railroad the current freight operator. Please change the redirect that I have created if you find something more suitable. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:00, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Note that "Cape Main Line" is the name given and referenced in the CapeFlyer article and the "Cape mainline" is in South Africa. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:21, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

The Cape Main Line is today owned by MassDOT. Makes sense to me that the Cape Main Line redirect point to Cape Cod Railroad for the moment - until someone starts an article on this topic. Note that the Cape Cod Central Railroad is just the tourist train operator. Freight service on Cape Cod today is provided by Massachusetts Coastal Railroad (MassCoastal). Any suggestions on what should be used in the "Line" element of the Infobox station template (if anything) for the former stations on Cape Cod such as Woods Hole Railroad Station (where neither the tracks or the station structure are present today), Chatham Railroad Station where the station structure is still there but the tracks are not, and Monument Beach Railroad Station (where the station structure and tracks are still there but the station is no longer used as passenger station.) FFM784 (talk) 21:21, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016

Some of the demographic info is back - on the Burlington, Vermont and the Vermont pages. Sorry to remove some of the demographic info (I was never planning on removing all of it from every Vermont-related page, only the info from some counties and municipalities as well as the state). I think it's mostly irrelevant on the page since there's so much of it that the demographic info shouldn't be listed in entirety - there probably should be a separate article on Demographics of Vermont. I do at this point regret removing information, but I don't really have the discipline and/or time to put all of the info back (at this moment/point). Cynulliad (talk) 23:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks for the update. FFM784 (talk) 14:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hampden County statement

Hey FFM784, I find it hilarious that you would go in there and delete my comment about Wilbraham. Wikipedia is not picture perfect you know. tom991

I removed the text "Wilbraham, Massachusetts is very boring" that you added to Hampden County, Massachusetts because the comment, which I assume is your personal opinion, does not belong on Wikipedia. Please review WP:ORIGINAL. Thanks. FFM784 (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Amherst Railway Society

Ay any chance FFM784 are you a member of the Amherst Railway Society? Also why did you go and delete my statement on Sexual Frustration? Please don't be trolling me. thanks tom991 P.S. I haven't taken the time out to sign things on here properly because well just because.

I deleted the wording that you added to Sexual frustration because no citation was provided. Wikipedia policy (WP:ORIGINAL) says "to demonstrate that you are not adding Original Research, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented." Please be assured that I am not trolling you. FFM784 (talk) 18:17, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

WP:SPI into User:Scott19982

You may wish to comment Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Scott19982. Morphenniel (talk) 09:30, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

South Coast Rail

Hi there your right about the South coast rail starting in 2024 but the mbta is saying that phase 1 is set to start in 2022 I'm sorry about the inconveniences Scott19982 (talk) 00:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Greater Springfield Wikiproject?

Hey FFM784, User Simtropolitan is in the process of trying to organize a Wikiproject around Springfield, its geography, history, and culture, and I would like to invite you to join/become as a fellow editor. As I believe some of us have the same interest and can help one an other as we go along. There are absolutely no obligations, this would simply be a resource to discuss and keep track of Springfield/Holyoke/Chicopee articles that need to be written or improved. For example see WikiProject Boston. He just need a certain amount of other users to express interest for WikiProject to be set up by the admins, and after that it can exist on its own indefinitely. If you'd like to, feel free to add your name in the supporters section here, and let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks, Carlos -- --YeahImaBoss (talk) 20:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Smith College notable alumnae

Hi. Please see my note on the Smith College Talk page. Let's work together to come up with a viable solution.

List of Union College alumni additions

Greetings, User:FFM784. Thank you for your patrol of redundant or spurious names being added to the Union College page's List of Union College alumni section, as well as your informative and instructive edit summaries on the History page.

Seeking to head off spurious entries at the above article I have added a hidden note both there and at the List of Union College alumni pages explaining that new alumni additions must meet Wikipedia notability guidelines and have their own articles, or be provided with a Wikipedia-appropriate citation establishing their notability and ties to the school. Either way, an alumnus needs to be notable to be added, as the section is not a catch-all for miscellaneous pals or pet figures, nor a fly-trap for pop cultural references masquerading as alumni entries (as was the addition on Ben Schwartz by an unregistered user, compared either to user ElKevbo's excellent trim down of it before your excision or the pre-existing entry for Schwartz at the List page).

Keep up the good work. Cheers, Wikiuser100 (talk) 15:30, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Filbert Street

Hi, if you look at page 94 here, it clearly says "Filbert Street Line" in the diagram. Did you interpret this differently? — C16SH (speak up) 16:38, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi there. That name didn't show up when I searched for the word "Filbert Street Line" in the PDF, probably because it was listed vertically. I see it now on page 94 in the diagram.

The term "Filbert Street Line" apparently does not appear anywhere else in the document. I also did a Google search of these three words on in quotes and it does not appear anywhere on the Internet that would suggest that this is or was the name of the tunnel, except for the addition of this term to the the article Jefferson Station (SEPTA).

It would seem to me that a single usage of this name in a diagram should not be used as the justification to create a another name for this tunnel, a name that no other source appears to have ever used -- except the person who prepared page 94 of the EIS.

I would suggest that this name not be used unless some further proof, beyond this single usage of the term, can be found. If you disagree then I ask that you post this issue on the Talk page of the article so that other editors can chime in, since to me this is not a minor point. Thanks FFM784 (talk) 17:18, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I think that is reasonable. — C16SH (speak up) 01:56, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

16ConcordeSSC

There is a new AN-notice concerning this editor here Blue Riband► 05:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Greenfield Massachusetts new section

Hi FFM784, Thanks for the reminder to add citations to the new Greenfield "Culture" section. I am completely new to this and knew I needed to do it but was burned out by the simple effort of putting in the content. The nudge was much appreciated. Eleanor.Bel.Cher (talk) 16:17, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the citations. You did a nice job with the detail you included. It takes a while to learn the ins and outs of editing on Wikipedia, so hang in there.FFM784 (talk) 19:10, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Archive 1