Jump to content

User talk:Ktr101/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6→Archive 8

Something for you

 Military history reviewers' award 
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period 1 April-30 September 2010, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award.  Roger Davies talk 08:18, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

DYK nomination of Kenneth North

Hello! Your submission of Kenneth North at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Still no good. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Fixed! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

An update from adopt a user

Hi there Ktr101! You may be wondering, what have I done to sound the alarm this time? Nothing. I'm messaging you in regards to the adopt-a-user program, which currently has a backlog of users wishing to be adopted. This doesn't make much sense, as we have a considerable list of users offer adoption, so there shouldn't be any backlog. I've begun to eliminate this backlog myself through a matching program, but I need your help to make it work. Of course, adoptees and adopters don't have to go through there, but I believe it helps eliminate the backlog because someone is actively matching pairs.

On the list of adopters, I have modified the middle column to say "Interests." It's easier working with other users that have similar interests, so if it's not too much to ask, could you add your interests in the middle column? For example, if I was interested in hurricanes, computers, business, and ... reptiles? I would place those in the middle column. Counter-vandalism and the like can also be included (maintenance should be used as the general term). The more interests, the better, since adoptees can learn more about you and choose the one they feel most comfortable working with. The information about when you're most active and other stuff can go into the "Notes" section to the right.

Finally, I've gone around and asked adoptees (and will in the future) to fill in a short survey so adopters can take the initiative and contact users they feel comfortable working with. We all know that most adoptees just place the adopt me template on their user page and leave it - so it's up to us to approach them and offer adoption. So, please take a look at the survey, adopt those that fit your interests, and maybe watchlist it so you can see the interests of adoptees and adopt one that fits your interests in the future.

Once again, thank you for participating in the adopt-a-user program! If you wish to respond to this post, please message me on my talk page.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Netalarm (talk) at 05:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC).

DYK for Kenneth North

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians_open_to_whale_squishing

Hi. Category:Wikipedians_open_to_whale_squishing, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your comments at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_October_14#Category:Wikipedians_open_to_whale_squishing would be appreciated. Why did you create it? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:28, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The same reason that we have a trouting category, albeit a bit more akwardly worded. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:05, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Massachusetts college categories

The problem is that you're not going about it correctly; you need to leave the articles in the categories until CFD says that they should be deleted. Nyttend (talk) 00:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

It might well be useful to maintain separate categories for chronological purposes: for example, to separate out those who attended before the name was changed. I might not support deletion at CFD, and if I did, I'd only do it weakly. Nyttend (talk) 00:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Very well, but it's still not an appropriate way to go about category moving. Nyttend (talk) 01:05, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm not going to perform an IAR deletion that I believe to be a bad idea. Nyttend (talk) 01:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
No: that's called forum shopping. Speedy deletions are for obvious cases, and it's inappropriate just to keep retagging until you find an admin that will do it. Take it to CFD if you want to have it deleted. Nyttend (talk) 01:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Robert L. Rutherford

The DYK project (nominate) 18:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Question

Another Massachusetts question for you: I was preparing to do a "Health" section similar (but probably smaller) than Virginia's, and I was wondering which, if any, hospitals should be specifically mentioned. I was going to mention Massachusetts General Hospital, as it is well known and seems to be near the top of many "Best Hospital" lists, but I wasn't sure if Boston Medical Center also deserved a mention. Perhaps there are other institutions I'm missing as well. AlexiusHoratius 15:30, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, there are many places that you are missing. Besides Mass General and Boston Medical, we have Cape Cod Hospital (won some awards, but I am biased since I live on the Cape), Brigham and Women's, Dana–Farber Cancer Institute, Tufts Medical Center, Shriners Hospitals for Children, and probably a couple of others which I can't think about at this time. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I'll check into it. One of the issues is that it's a bit like the "College" sections for states - really only room for a couple of the largest public and private universities and then link to a full list on another page. I'll try to expand it a bit, though. Thanks. AlexiusHoratius 21:50, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) 		Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals

Articles

A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles

Members

Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)

Editorial

In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 20:07, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Cape Cod and the Islands/archive1

Hi there, as there haven't been any comments on the peer review for over a month, shall I archive it? I was going to comment a while ago, but I was waiting to see what you did in response to EA's comments, to avoid me commenting on things that were about to be changed anyway (and I'm not sure what's been done). If you still want feedback, it's no problem: you can either keep this one going, or come back again when you've got more time, but an update either way would help keep the page up-to-date. Regards, BencherliteTalk 21:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Eh, do whatever you want. For the most part, with the exception of a few things I think I have fixed most of it. Over the next few days I'll go ahead and see what is still missing and correct it. I've just been busy lately so I'm hoping that a bit of freedom from constant band will allow me to go ahead and get a bit more involved here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:34, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
OK, but if you'd like me to take a look before you go to FPoC (or even at FPoC if I don't review it quickly enough), please let me know. Yours, BencherliteTalk 21:50, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay, will do. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox drive-in theater

Template:Infobox drive-in theater has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. WOSlinker (talk) 18:43, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

It's raining thanks spam!

  • Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
  • There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
  • If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks • Ling.Nut (talk) 02:25, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Ashtiani

Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani

Hi, I saw you added the recent death template but didn't add any thing to support it, have you got a citation, I have googled and found only reports that it is delayed? Iranian woman's execution delayed amid backlash - Off2riorob (talk) 20:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

No, I just wrongly assumed that it had already happened. My bad, thanks for fixing that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:20, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Croton Aqueduct

Hi. I removed your addition the "Mt. Pleasant, New York" category from this article, because the aqueduct passes through three four towns and the city of Yonkers, so it's not a part of any of those political entities in toto. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:28, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay. If anything, adding all the towns onto the page is what should be done. That's just my opinion though. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that's possible, and I considered it, but we don't put all the localities a highway goes through in our articles on those roads. Westchester is important to the aqueduct, as the location where the water originated, while NYC is (obviously) important as the place the water is delivered to. Compared to these two units, Cortlandt, Ossining, Mt. Pleasant, Greenburgh and Yonkers just aren't as significant, not to mention that, if we're going to do things that way, we should add the cats for Hastings, Dobbs Ferry, Irvington, Tarrytown etc. to the article. I think it's best to keep it as it is. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Greg Dean Schmitz

My apologies for switching categories. Since Schmitz went to high school in Marquette County, Wisconsin it was more practical to list him from the county he had lived in Wisconsin instead of making one category that Greg Dean Schmitz may be the only one that would be listed in for quite some time. Thank youRFD (talk) 19:58, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I created the category and it is now in place-Thank you-RFD (talk) 20:06, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Political subdivisions of Wisconsin

Hi-Just a quick note you might find this article Political subdivisions of Wisconsin informative and interesting. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 12:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks like it covers a lot of the unknowns of Wisconsin life. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:21, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mark's Meadow Elementary School

The article Mark's Meadow Elementary School has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable public elementary school.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gorrad (talk) 01:53, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Stark's Knob

The DYK project (nominate) 18:05, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:14, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Categories

Hello, I'm curious why you're adding redlinked categories. Do you plan on creating them later? Thanks --CutOffTies (talk) 18:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's all part of my evil master plan of tagging it now and creating it later. It's pretty evil in my opinion. It should all be done in thirty minutes. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
The category you added for Carlton Fisk still hasn't been created. [1]. Thanks. --CutOffTies (talk) 15:12, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm getting to it. I am adding the categories, saving the pages to my favorites bar and then creating them at a later date when I can tag all the people from each locality. It isn't the most time-friendly process but it tags everyone and there aren't gaps in coverage. Happy Thanksgiving! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:22, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your support at my RfA last week. I'll do everything I can to live up to your expectations and if you ever need help from a janitor please feel free to drop me a line! PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:00, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

People from Washington, Maine

Hi there, I have nominated Category:People from Washington, Maine to be merged into Category:People from Knox County, Maine. Feel free to comment. Thanks--TM 06:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles for Creation

First off welcome to Articles for Creation. I noticed a couple of cases where the submitter resubmitted after the submission being declined. Please know that the submissions are permitted to be resubmitted and should not be declined until after a new review. Thank you, Alpha Quadrant talk 14:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try to remember that next time. I think that I have the process down to a science now so that's a good thing I guess. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

AfC Submissions

Hello, I am here to inform you as an experienced AfC editor that you are declining AfC Articles without actually reviewing them. We have had many complaints in IRC today about submissions being declined that should not have been. Most of which have been reviewed by you. I would like to kindly ask you to take a minute to read the reviewing instructions located here. You should be putting a majority of them on hold instead of declining to give the users a chance to fix the mistakes. Before you go on reviewing I need you to look at those and tell me you understand them. Then I as well as the other editors expect you to follow those guidelines and think before you review. Do not just skim, you need to FULLY read the article. As you said, you have this down to a science, you do not. You are still making mistakes constantly. You need to take the above advice and if you cannot get it right you will need to remove yourself from the process. We appreciate your help but we need editors who can do it right. Thank you.  JoeGazz  ▲  17:43, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I do know that I have made mistakes but that's expected when I've been here less than a week for this stuff. I also take full responsibility for my actions and would appreciate it if you could please provide links so that I can know where I went wrong. That being said, please do not put words in my mouth by falsely quoting me about saying that I had perfected this process. In reality, I said that I thought that I had perfected this. Complete confidence and speculation are two different things. I know that getting good at each process takes time and I would never say that I have completely mastered something because honestly, that is very cocky. I look forward to figuring this process out more in the future. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:29, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car

This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.davidpride.com/Air_WP/WP7_222.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 06:48, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Geology of Massachusetts

Hello! Your submission of Geology of Massachusetts at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mikenorton (talk) 21:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I meant to have a look at this earlier, sorry that I took so long to get round to it. I'll try to organise my thoughts about the problems that I see, on the article talk page. Mikenorton (talk) 21:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

SouthWest Community Credit Union

Hi Kevin, thanks again for reviewing this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/SouthWest_Community_Credit_Union I have gone back and corrected several issues with the article. I have cited quite a few sources throughout the article, and fixed some links that were not accurate. I have worked hard to ensure everything is factual and that I have good references. Would you be willing to review this again? This is my first real article and I have learned a lot. Regards, Roger — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogerjdutah (talk • contribs) 01:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this isn't notable for Wikipedia. Please read the notability guidelines for organizations and companies to understand why the article doesn't meet the guidelines. Try working with articles that are here first and you will likely start to learn what is and is not notable. Over time, you will notice that you have a knack for writing articles that are rather good. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:15, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Ktr101. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

QAsmi1234 (talk) 16:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

More AfC Issues With Your Closing

Again you have failed to close AfC Submissions correctly, I am not the kind of person to sugar coat things. It is getting on multiple user's nerves and it needs to stop. We had a complaint by a user on IRC AGAIN about a AfC You closed, [2]. At this time I am going to have to ask you to remove yourself from the process for 1 week, re-read the guidelines and then only once you know the process, begin again. If this continues, we will be initiating a community consensus to place a Project Ban on you from AfC. Wikipedia has procedures that need to be followed, please review them and actually follow them. Thank you.  JoeGazz  ▲  15:10, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Please note that I have barely even touched the process since the last time you notified me. I maybe have closed one or two, and even then I don't think they were controversial. Look at the one request above this, I didn't even touch the resulting page. The example that you cited above occured before you last notified me so I have no idea what the hell you want me to do. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, RE: Alison Smith-Squire submission. I am not happy that you again have again declined this submission. It might be it should be declined but I would prefer it to be dealt with by someone other than you. It's quite clear from the way you have declined this twice that you haven't looked at journalism in the UK or the British journalism submissions that already exist on Wiki. I don't find it fair that the same person keeps coming along and declining it - I think it would be much fairer if you asked someone else to look at this submission. I am going to seek help elsewhere and make a complaint about this as I don't find the way you have behaved to be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.97.238.240 (talk • contribs) 05:47, December 14, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll revert myself. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Geology of Massachusetts

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car

Hello! Your submission of Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Guerillero | My Talk 19:57, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car

Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Expand

Template:Expand has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 134.253.26.6 (talk) 22:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Gulf War Order of battle Coalition Forces Ground Campaign

Hello i would like to ask for your input in what i should put on my introductions.--71.213.94.123 (talk) 08:23, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I would just basically say something like, "The order of battle in the Gulf War included...(insert the number of certan units here)... and cconsisted of (insert number of people here)." I would definitely expand off of that though so feel free to do what you want to it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
It that the only thing that holding up article from being accepted is the introductions and contexts?--71.213.89.167 (talk) 03:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, since it would be nice to have some context in that article. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:56, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Did you see the latest change made from early?--71.213.89.167 (talk) 04:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Is there any more information that you can add to the header though? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Like?--71.213.89.167 (talk) 04:26, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Joining up on the UMass Wikiproject

I should thank you for starting this wikiproject- I'm also a student here at UMass, and have been disappointed by the lack of information out there about many of its departments and buildings. Although I can't blame UMass for wanting to move on to projects outside of agriculture, they've really been neglecting many of their older programs and some of the halls on campus are slated for demolition (I'm glad to hear Grinnell is still standing). I'm hoping by putting more of this information out there, the admins might think twice before tearing down some of these places and cutting off some of these programs. If you ever want to exchange information and get some more articles on the table just drop me a message. Happy Holidays and have a Happy New Year! Ken (talk) 18:22, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

We should definitely meet up next semester and help coordinate stuff. I have already contacted the librarians at our school way up on the twenty fifth floor and they are more than willing to work with us. I would love to get up there and basically expand on what they have put up. This included the YouMass wiki, a library site, and the Umass wiki, a site set up by some student. The former and better one doesn't use MediaWiki software though while the latter uses MediaWiki even though it doesn't have anything notable. I've also tried to get the librarians to re-license their publications so that we can basically copy all of their information onto this site. I have a few maps that I need to scan and stitch together, but otherwise I don't have much from them though. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Christmas Card

User:DeltaQuad/Christmas2010

Thanks! I guess this will also pass as a birthday wish as well. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Jan. 3

Terms of members of Congress begin & end on January 3. Even if the session begins/ends on a different date, their tenure is pegged to the Congress.—Markles 22:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, the news said differently but I was right originally. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:32, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Horace M. Wade

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Horace M. Wade, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.7thbg.org/GenWade.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:08, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Heh, again I fool the bots with a mirror site. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:10, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ktr101, could you give me a link to the non-mirror site, at the moment I've blanked the article as a potential copyright infringment, as there is no mention of any other site on the flagged one, I can see a claim of copyright. Thanks, Acather96 (talk) 06:32, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
The public domain site from where the information was actually taken. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:35, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

IRC Help - Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher Article.

Thanks for the help on IRC concerning Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher concerning the source for his DOB (date of birth). Feel free to ask for any feedback on the english wikipedia. Adamdaley (talk) 04:55, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Timothy F. O'Keefe

This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Timothy F. O'Keefe, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/tfokeefe.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 21:11, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

The material on that site was actually taken from a public domain site so there is nothing wrong with it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:40, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

My article

Hi, my article was declined and im new to wiki but i believe it is better than many previous articles that have been allowed on wiki so i am wondering how i can get it to be published? thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by WillPokeDa (talk • contribs) 05:31, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry, merry

Bzuk (talk) 23:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

F. Michael Rogers

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of F. Michael Rogers, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/fmrogers.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:22, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

That page in turn was taken from here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:38, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Articles_for_creation/Michael_Head

Criteria 7 of notability for academics says:

"Criterion 7 may also be satisfied if the person has authored widely popular general audience books on academic subjects provided the author is widely regarded inside academia as a well-established academic expert and provided the books deal with that expert's field of study."

Head has authored the following popular general audience books on law:

- Evgeny Pashukanis: A Critical Reappraisal, Routledge-Cavendish 2007

- Law in Perspective: Ethics, Society and Critical Thinking (with Scott Mann), UNSW Press 2005

- Administrative Law: Context and Critique, Federation 2005

Furthermore, these books deal with his field of study.

Please let me know what you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.193.165 (talk) 10:18, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a source that states that the books are widely popular? The problem with such statement is that I cannot fact check that statement. Also, just because a book sells doesn't necessarily make it popular. You should also find more sources to back it up. For now I am going to decline it but that doesn't mean that you can't re-submit it later on. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 07:21, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

John W. Pauly

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of John W. Pauly, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/jwpauly.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:39, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Taken from here, nothing to worry about. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Article submission 'The Projects'

Hi Kevin

Regarding my article submission, I believed the band to be of significance given that their vocalist is from the hugely popular band Ladytron.

--PatrickCooper (talk) 10:23, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't necessarily make notability right there. I don't see any independent sources on the article so this article won't be created quickly unless you can provide notability from an independent source or something. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:35, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
The Metro tabloid newspaper is an independent source, no? PatrickCooper (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Not really since it is a tabloid. Can you find better sources? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:14, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, so you need a verifiable source that is more reliable than a daily London newspaper to verify that Mira Aroyo of the band Ladytron is also a member of this band The Project? I found this scan of their record cover with the name 'Mira Aroyo' on it, is that good enough? http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=1714395 Because there isn't so much out there about them. Not that there shouldn't be :) PatrickCooper (talk) 22:32, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Not really because I feel like any band could upload their disc cover there. For now I would just wait until they gain notability and then come back and work a bit more on them. A good year or two of performing might change the game a bit. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:36, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Horace M. Wade

Hello! Your submission of Horace M. Wade at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PM800 (talk) 11:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Would you like me to move the article to your userspace and delete the redirect? That way, you cna try again for DYK if you feel like it. Please leave me a talkback. Nyttend (talk) 15:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
No, I'm fine with keeping it in the mainspace. There is nothing wrong with the article and we're talking about twelve pages that have been created over the last week with a similar process. I can cite the article and the remaining articles but I really don't understand how no one caught the first two articles that I nominated and I'm really only being told about this fact after two articles passed through. In the strictest sense of terms, I haven't copied them word for word and I have modified them oh so slightly. If there is any way you think I can get it to work, I am willing to bend over backwards to do so. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:13, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Grondemar RFA

Hi Kevin

Just FYI, I have commented here on my concerns about your recent contributions to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Grondemar.

You are probably watching the page anyway, but since I have been critical of you, it seemed fair to draw this directly to your attention. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:08, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I have the page watched but I usually just go back every now and then to see how interesting things have become. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:19, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Context

You held Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gina DeVettori, saying "This article provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see tips on how to better format your article.", yet it clearly establishes context. Mono (talk) 18:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I would like to see a bit more information on them in the article, which would suffice as context. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Earl T. O'Loughlin

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Earl T. O'Loughlin, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.militarybios.com/biography/GeneralEarlTOLoughlin.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:52, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

And that site in turn was taken from here, without attribution that is. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Warning

You recently moved User:Schooldhospitality/School D' Hospitality to School D' Hospitality, despite the warning in the MFD template stating "but please do not blank, merge, or move it, or remove this notice, while the discussion is in progress". Please cease and desist this disruptive editing. WuhWuzDat 14:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

It was agreed upon that it was ready for the mainspace. Also, I'm being far from disruptive here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey guess what!

You're my loyal minion! :D — GorillaWarfare talk 17:36, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I know, it's great (bows to kiss Gorilla's feet)! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:50, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Robert D. Russ

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Robert D. Russ, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://myweb.cableone.net/dfaltus/General%20Robert%20D.%20Russ.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:30, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, another page that is a copyvio. I'm still good though. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:35, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Duane H. Cassidy

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Duane H. Cassidy, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.atalink.org/HallOfFame/Members/cassidy.aspx.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:21, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Nope, nice try. I took it from here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Prelude in B Minor
Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured sound status, File:Rachmaninoff Prelude in B Minor, Op. 32, No. 10.oga, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 1:36pm • 02:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

re Robert Macauley

I got ahead of myself and nominated Robert Macauley for DYK even though I had only used a single source. I had a few other sources that I was going to ahead but I got caught up with errands and didn't get a chance to expand and further reference the article. Thanks for beating me to the punch. Alansohn (talk) 03:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem, that's what Wikipedians are for. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

re an AfC decline

You recently declined Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/December 2010 Copenhagen Terrorist Plot Against Jyllands-Posten.

Hmm, are you sure about this? It does seem notable and well-sourced, even though being a still very recent news item, and written like a news release. I'm not going to reverse your decision, I already spoke with the author in the irc help channel and he agreed to hold off on it until more time has passed, so it's not a big deal or anything, but maybe you could take a second look at it? -- Ϫ 09:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Came to leave a very similar message- you're still going a bit too fast, Kev. This article clearly asserted notability, and the author was naturally rather annoyed about the spurious hold. I know it's not yet up to scratch, but that's what we're here for as reviewers- to bring our skills in formatting and knowledge of Wikipedia's guidelines to helping newbies create articles about subjects which are established to be notable. Please be more conscientious about your reviews- we are after all "customer service" in a way, on the forefront of interaction with people outside our community who have something to contribute, and we do not need those people leaving thinking we are incompetent. I'll be working on the article in question, but I'd advise you to tread carefully when reviewing AfCs from now on, because it's got to a point where you've been cautioned more than once for this exact thing and I would expect better from an established editor. sonia♫ 00:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
To OlEnglish, I was wrong and sorry for not getting back to you earlier but I skipped over this. I just created it as we speak. To Sonia, I was being overly cautious there and I just placed it on hold. It was a dumb mistake and I take full responsibility for it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK

I saw your comments on DYK re PD sources. I find that if I find an article I want to put to DYK and there is a PD source then I first write the article using every reliable source I can to find key facts (without the "best reference") - at this point its normally quite a nice article . I then add in any missing facts from the PD source .... and it ready for DYK and there is no paraphrase issues. Pls ignore if this doesnt help Victuallers (talk) 13:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you completely on that. The problem is is that there are so few sources that pretty much the only one that is reliable is the one that I am not only copying, but also the one that isn't a mirror site. It sucks but unfortunately that's the way it is right now. Happy New Year! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Racism in Film of the United States

Hello! Your submission of Racism in Film of the United States at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Wasted Time R (talk) 12:13, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Portal question

Hi, and happy new year. I'll try and take a look later this week - things are busy here for the next few days as I get back to work after the holidays. Feel free to remind me if seven days pass without me doing anything! Regards, BencherliteTalk 10:57, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The New Bottom Billion

Hi. I've been trying to get this article accepted, and have been having a lot of difficulty. Although Im new to all of this, it seems as though you have been reviewing it so thought I would message directly to ask for some guidance on what needs to be done to the article. All the rejections tend to display the same message about how the article does not sufficiently explain the significance of the subject, but I have now put in an entire section doing just this. And in regards to the Speedy Deletion Criteria (A7), this criterion does not even seem to apply given that the article is neither about an individual/organisation/animal nor web content - it is legitimate academic research that just happens to be widely disseminated via the internet. Finally, regarding the notability criteria, the wiki guidelines state: 'if a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article'. Surely by listing an extensive list of independent external links which cover the subject, I am demonstrating just that? Please could you advise as to how I need to amend this, because I genuinely have no idea. One final point: perhaps the reason this is being rejected is because it is based on first hand research. But that doesn't explain why a subject of extremely close relation (The Bottom Billion - research by Paul Collier) has its own entry. Would you be able to draw the distinction between these two, because as far as I can make out there isn't one.

Sorry for the lengthy message, but I've hit a bit of a wall with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.195.202 (talk) 12:10, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

It's alright, I'm used to longer messages. The article needs work, in the form of fixing the links and whatnot but that's nothing I couldn't do this afternoon. I might rewrite the article a tad bit though as well since it does sound a bit akward, but after looking at some of the links on the internet, it is notable. I'll also trim down the external links section and possibly convert them into citations since the list is a bit long. I'll also bring up the noteworthiness aspect on the IRC channel tonight since there were others who were unsure of its notability and I would like to hear their input. In the end though, it looks notable so there is nothing to fear. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your reply. I look forward to seeing what happens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.198.5 (talk) 17:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK query

Hello! Your submission of Philip M. Breedlove at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Soman (talk) 18:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Cornfield Bomber

Thanks for this article Victuallers (talk) 21:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Sebastiane Award

I have been able to read the comments you made to my article. First of all, I am not an expert in wikipedia, but to show the "relevance" of "Sebastiane Award" I have included two references more.

This is an award equivalent to Teddy Award (International Film Festival of Berlin) or Lion Queer (International Film Festival of Venice) (both ot them in wikipedia), in english. Sebastiane Award has its equivalent in spanish (and bask) wikipedia ("Premio Sebastiane").

In the first reference I have included the official page of International Film Festival of San Sebastiane where it is mentioned the 2010 winner of Sebastiane Award.

Please let me know if this is enough. Thank you very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zinesebastiane (talk • contribs) 09:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

It would really help at this point if you had independent news sources so that you could back up the award a bit. Otherwise the article is pretty solid. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 07:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I have added more references (independent new sources) in order to improve the article as you have commented on

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, Ktr101/Archive 4! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 21:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Collapsing Opposites

Hello Kevin, Thank you for reviewing my article on "Collapsing Opposites". You have said that my "suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject" and that I should see Wikipedia's "guidelines on music-related topics". I have looked at this link and I believe my suggestion does indeed explain the importance and significance of the subject. Wikipedia's guidelines for music-related topics states that:

"A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria:

1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1]

  • This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following:

o Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3]

o Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories.

o Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar) would generally be considered trivial but should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

2. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.

4. Has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[note 4]"

The third paragraph of my suggestion CLEARLY meets criteria items 1 and 2 on this list, with multiple independent reliable non-trivial sources cited to back it up. The fourth paragraph of my suggestion clearly meets criteria item #4 on this list with one independent reliable non-trivial source cited to back it up.

This suggestion is worthy of inclusion in wikipedia. Please give it another chance. Thank you, Naomi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naomibartz (talk • contribs) 08:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I just don't feel as though it is notable. Yes it is in independent sources, but putting "The band has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works appearing in reliable independent sources such as..." into an article is probably one of the worst things you can do to it (trying to assert notability so blatently is looked down upon here). I'll let someone else review it but not a lot of people are active at the moment doing stuff so it might take some time. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay... I didn't realize that stating something like that was such a faux pas. :) I have edited that part out to make it not so blatant. Could you approve the article now since it does clearly meet wikipedia's criteria for notability? thanks.Naomibartz (talk) 01:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to keep bugging you- just wondering if you've had a chance to think about it? Is it available for others to review? Thanks 96.49.46.92 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:03, 10 January 2011 (UTC).

It's all good. I decided to let someone else approve or disapprove of it who hasn't reviewed it before. It appears as though it was declined. Sorry. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Kevin, it looks like it was not made available for someone else to review because it still says declined but when you click the page history you can see that you are the only one who has reviewed. Could you please undecline it or make it available for others to review? thanks Naomibartz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:57, 12 January 2011 (UTC).

Sorry for not getting back to you there. There was a backlog and I forgot that I pledged not to touch it. I'm so sorry for that mistake and for any harm that it caused. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Re. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HE Khadem Al Qubaisi

Hi, the creator of that submission came into IRC to ask for help with his article. As far as I can see, the submission is well-sourced, so may I know why did you decline the submission as unsourced or containing only unreliable sources? I checked and it seems that company websites can be used as sources in employees' articles. Bejinhan talks 12:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I guess that was because it was the best one that fit, even though it was quite off so that should've been a custom thing. If you look at the sources, they are mostly the same websites. I would like a diversity of sources though so that we can back up these statements a bit. I know that there are five sources but I would like sources that aren't company information ones. If that is all that is out there, then I guess we can accept it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

CfD notice

Article title correction

Comment - The title of this article is spelled wrong:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resturantuer

The correct spelling is Restaurateur. See this link:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/restaurateur

Please correct this, thanks!98.151.53.27 (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Ha, thanks for catching that flub. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Gene Cretz

I suggested marking his page as something that would change based on current events due to recent Wikileaks. As an ambassador for the US, isn't he notable enough to require this? He already had a page, and he may have to be replaced which is significant in US foreign policy in that region. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vramasub (talk • contribs) 08:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

The documents were released last month. "Current" on this site generally means something in the last week although there are differing opinions in reality. Nothing outside of a week is really "current" though. Otherwise, we don't tag articles based on what we think might happen due to the crystal ball effect. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 08:14, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
OK thanks for letting me know, I just stumbled upon the page so I thought it was worth marking. I'll keep that in mind though. Vyas Ramasubramani (talk) 08:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Joshua Anderson Hague - 1850-1916

I have given up the will. It would have been so much easier if I was told in the first place that Hague was not good enough. Congratulations another Newbie bites the dust. Have a nice day.SusanWynneThomson (talk) 13:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

It's alright, we all first start with articles that have notability issues but the more you work at it the better you will become. Don't be discouraged and feel free to write something anytime. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Question page move

I question the disambiguation (musician) that you moved this article to [3] None of the sourced content in the article appears to refer to his musical accomplishments in any way. All of the coverage which makes him notable is related to his "exploits" within the virtual realms of the internet. Active Banana (bananaphone 00:04, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

The thing with placing "internet" after it is that it makes the subject appear as a web browser or something like that. Looking back, "internet personality" or something would be better suited for it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Neurocristopathy

I'm a little concerned about the fact you placed this article on hold because of unreliable sourcing- it was sourced to a journal entry and a published book on medical science. J Milburn (talk) 21:51, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

And what on earth is going on with this one? There's nothing wrong with book sources. Yes, there are issues with the article (lack of footnotes, POV, tone) but the lack of "non-book sources" is not one of them. If you're concerned it's a complete hoax, a quick Google search confirms that it isn't. J Milburn (talk) 22:12, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
And, for God's sake, if you're creating a new user's talk page, create it with a welcome note. Not a great big "fuck you, there are problems with your article". When you're working at AfC, you're the face of Wikipedia. As anyone who is using AfC is almost certainly acting in good faith, it could at least be a smiling face. J Milburn (talk) 22:14, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
The first one I wanted to be cautious on, the second one is showing a personal bias of mine to have a diversity of sources to strengthen it and the third issue could maybe be addressed by writing it into the script. I have done lots of new talk page creations in the past month and a half before but no one has asked me to do that yet. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:58, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
That's absolute bollocks, and if you don't recognise it as that, you really shouldn't be working with AfC. What was wrong with the sources of the first one? You wanted to be "cautious" and not accept peer reviewed journals? And I don't care about your personal biases- leave them at the door, or don't edit, the sourcing was fine. As for the last one, you can't blame the script for your own ineptitude. If nothing in the script is appropriate, do it manually. A script does not excuse you from bad editing. Seriously, do you not recognise how off-putting your edits are to new users? These were two articles on academic subjects, and were well sourced. These weren't kids writing about garage bands, these were intelligent, educated people, and the impression you've given them is that the sources they're using aren't acceptable. J Milburn (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
The reason I've come across this is because the authors in question have come onto the IRC help channel basically saying "I need more sources? Why, what's wrong with the sources I did use?" and, when I check the article, expecting links to blogs, I see they're fine. New editors are to be handled with care; the fact they're putting articles through these processes shows that they are almost certainly acting in good faith, they're just looking for a bit of help. Take your time, be welcoming, help them out, specifically explain any issues and, if necessary, get your hands mucky and help rewrite the article yourself. The scripts are useful for garage bands and such, but articles that stand a chance may benefit from manual editing. It's not a race; you're doing important work, try to give it the respect it warrants. J Milburn (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I would be willing to help add a welcome template, and maybe set it up to go with the AFC template if we could get someone to help recode the one that is already there. Personally I would also like to see if we can discuss fixing up the rather generic reasoning templates as they also don't cover everything and are a bit harsh (I just touched up a few of them which are rather cold right now, here). I'm wondering if we should add a parameter that would request that more sources be found or we add a variety because even if it is sourced to a blog, who are we to say that the website won't die next week and it is essentially sourceless (this assumes that the Internet Archive also doesn't have a copy of it). Thanks for your critisism and I look forward to hashing out something with you in the coming few days. Kevin Rutherford (talk)
My point about the blogs was that they are unreliable, not that they are online... A "variety" of sources is by no means a necessity, as long as there are sources and they are reliable. Plenty of featured articles would not be sourced to a "variety" of sources by your definition, it's not an issue. We need to focus on the issues that already exist in articles, not invent issues of our own. J Milburn (talk) 23:10, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh, sorry for missing the blog point. I do know that they are unreliable and that almost anyone can invent anything and post it with many people believing them. I also don't mean to imply I will fail an article because it doesn't meet expectations, but I only mean to encourage them to make the article better. If they can't do something, then we accept the article and move on. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm almost terrified to look at your contributions, but I just came across this edit. How many reliable sources do you actually want? No way does that fail A7, and I strongly, strongly doubt it would be deleted at AfD. The article now has bordering on a ridiculous number of sources, and it was sitting there languishing because you'd declined it... J Milburn (talk) 02:14, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Looking at it, it looks like I'm becomming too exclusionist in a way and being overly cautious. See above for what happened but I unintentionally declined it that time after pledging not to touch it. That was my fault and I feel horrible for breaking that promise. Sorry for that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

(12)

Just curious — what's the point of the (12) following the author's name in the first citation of Jenny Lind Tower? It looks like a typo to me, but I don't want to remove it and find that I mangled something. Nyttend (talk) 13:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I originally thought it was the actual day in the citation template thing but realized months later that I was wrong. I'm suprised I missed that one but I'll go correct it now. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:16, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Joshua Anderson Hague

Please can you tell me how to delete this article, and can I get rid of it on my contributions page? Thanks SusanWynneThomson (talk) 11:58, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, (newbie) please can you tell me how to delete this article, and is there any way I can delete it from my contributions page? SusanWynneThomson (talk) 12:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Hello; you are referring to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joshua Anderton Hague, correct? Place the code {{db-author}} on the page, which will put it in the category Candidates for speedy deletion. This code will also produce a template saying that the creator and main content contributor of a page wants it deleted. An administrator will review it and see if it is fit for deletion. Since db-author falls under WP:G7, it should be fairly non-controversial, and you can also just request that it be deleted like you did above. I don't think there are any restrictions on deleting AfC candidates (correct me if I'm wrong). I would be happy to delete it if you wish (I'm just not 100% positive what page you're referring to. For future reference, it'd be good to include a link to the page you mention.) Happy editing, Airplaneman ✈ 14:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Airplaneman. She means the page here. Susan, why you want to delete it? I'm just curious about that but if you don't want to tell me you don't have to. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
I believe that SusanWynneThomson would like the page moved because the title has a spelling error in it. I have been away for the past two weeks, just now looking at my talk page. SusanWynneThomson requested I change the title. I looked into it to see if it had been resolved, which led me to your talk page. I can move it now if that is what SusanWynneThomson wants. Best, Alpha Quadrant talk 19:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Decatur County Courthouse (Indiana)

Materialscientist (talk) 18:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

On DYK Review

Thanks for reviewing my DYK nomination Coffin birth. As you may have noticed, that a first for me. I was just wondering, what happens now? Do I just wait until it's selected to be put on the main page? Also, I wondered if my hook was too tame. I almost wrote "...in Brussels, in 1633, a woman died in convulsions and three days later the fetus was spontaneously expelled in a rare event called coffin birth? Would that be too gory or offensive? Does the DYK people watch for that sort of thing? Boneyard90 (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

At this point, you can just wait. It used to be that they would pick from articles that were the oldest and place them on the main page but now it could be tomorrow or two weeks from now. In terms of the hook, the funkier, the better. Something like, "In 1633, a fetus burst out of a dead woman?" would work because it sounds cool, doesn't describe the situation, and makes the reader want to know why it happened. I'm not sure, but that might even work for the April Fools Day run since it's that odd. If you want to put it there, just tell me and I can see that it will be moved. The only downside is that it won't appear for the next two and a half months but no one will likely object. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:01, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for North Platte Canteen

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Fernald Hall

Hello! Your submission of Fernald Hall at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Brian the Editor (talk) 21:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

25 DYKs

The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
Congrats for hitting the 25 DYK mark. Keep up the good work and keep 'em coming! - The Bushranger One ping only 17:25, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:22, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010



To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot (talk) 21:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Tropolis

Hello! Your submission of Tropolis at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jrcla2 (talk) 03:47, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Tewksbury Mills

Hello! Your submission of Tewksbury Mills at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PM800 (talk) 03:46, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Declined speedy

Hi there, letting you know that I declined your speedy tag on 861st Radar Squadron. It's a reasonable search term and the redirect destination is also reasonable. Please remember to use one of the speedy deletion rationales when you're tagging. Cheers, Danger (talk) 07:01, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Query

Hi KTR101, What is a "covered part"? Thanks Bongomatic 06:03, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

What is this in reference to? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:22, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Ah, I know what you are talking about. Basically in high school we might have a cue to play the part of another instrument. Since there were so few of us compared to the Umass band, we just played the parts of others. It worked out when your part wasn't the best or the same as everyone elses as well. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Bongomatic 08:11, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors

I saw the quality of your contributions at DYK and clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 21:12, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I could have a look at it. Right now I'm unsure of how my workload will look for this semester but I'll try to pitch in where I can. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:05, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Tropolis

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Reenem's RfA

I see that you closed his RfA. I agree with the closure, but you don't seem to have made any comments on the RfA, or its talkpage to justify the closure (except stating WP:NOTNOW). More importantly, you don't seem to have left Reenem a note on his talk page. I think the latter would be a nice thing to do. Also, isn't it customary to mention that it is a non-admin closure? — Fly by Night (talk) 16:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I had to go to class after closing the things, but I never really have heard of leaving a reasoning behind a decision like that. I'll go back and do the non-admin thing as I forgot that that's customary. I will also leave a note as well as soon as possible. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Even though it was a clear closure, Reenem put himself on the line and he's probably feeling a bit wounded at the moment. Putting a human touch on things might make him feel a little better. — Fly by Night (talk) 17:23, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

JBLM - McChord

Greetings, please see the most recent discussion on the talk page for McChord when you have a moment and followup if you could. Thanks Srobak (talk) 23:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 28 January 2011



This is the first issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program newsletter. Please read it! It has important information about the the current wave of classes, instructions and advice, and other news about the ambassador program.



Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:33, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Jenny Lind Tower

Hi there, regarding the Jenny Lind Tower DYK nomination, I guess what the reviewer wants from you is to use proper citation templates, so that others can go back to the sources if they want to. On the editing toolbar, click on the 'Cite' item. A toolbar underneath opens, and choose 'cite book' from the 'Templates' dropdown menu. Then fill out as much as you can about the Vuilleumier and Vuilleumier reference. When you ok this, it inserts a proper book cite template into the text. Schwede66 00:07, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

possible mentor

Hello, I am a student at Montana State University and one of my classes is Native American Studies. For a project we are working with Wikipedia and will be working on editing or adding to current articles dealing with the study of Indian Law and Policy. Part of the requirements is that we pick someone that has experience in the world of Wiki. I saw your pic and read your small intro about yourself, and was wondering if you would be willing to work with me as an online mentor with editing documents and such. I have used wikipedea before, but never to this depth. Let me know if this will work for you...I am sure you have a pretty busy life. Kawasak.kid (talk) 17:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I would be more than willing to work with you. Although Indian Law and Policy is not something that I am presently familiar with, I would be willing to work with you on it. Just let me know what you need help with as I should be able to get back to you rather quickly, assuming I am not sleeping. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Mentoring US public policy

Hey man, how's it goin? I'm a student at James Madison University in VA, and for my technical editing class we're doing the wikiproject for US public policy. Would you be my mentor for this semester in case I run into any problems or get stuck somewhere?

Thanks,

Brian

BrianTaylor241 (talk) 20:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I can take you on as I am pretty competent in this aspect of politics. Just tell me what you need and I'll try to see what I can do for you. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey Kevin, hope all is well.

I have started editing for the article titled The Balanced Budget Act of 1997, and through some research have discovered some graphs that explain the act pretty well from the American Hospital Association. I was wondering if you know what the process would be to use these images on a Wikipedia page. Would that be considered fair use, or would it violate copyright?

Thanks, Brian BrianTaylor241 (talk) 21:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianTaylor241 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I would like to see the graphs first because you might be able to find the information and create your own graphs, thus skirting any potential copyright violations as you are the one who made it. I also noticed on the article that you removed a broken link. This is fine, but you also might want to check out The Internet Archive in the future so that you will be able to see old pages that no longer might be up. It is a really neat site and really works wonders when you need it. The only downside is that some sites won't allow their pages to be archived. The link that you removed though doesn't even show up in the archive so you are doing quite well for starters. Keep up the good work! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

re Montana state university sudents

ktr101-feel free to change the mentor for those msu students. I am one of the campus ambassadors for the msu students and am trying to get all their user pages up to speed. Your support is welcome. Thanks --Mike Cline (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Already done...I think. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Just sayin'

You're awesome. Tommy! 02:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! You are too. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jenny Lind Tower

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Pogonomyrmex californicus

Materialscientist (talk) 12:04, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Milton Levine

Materialscientist (talk) 12:05, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Roman and Williams Buildings and Interiors

Hello and thank you for your feedback re. this submission. Your comment was "suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject," and I am curious as to whether you feel our addition of materials supporting the subject's cultural impact will result in the article's acceptance, or do you simply feel the subject is just not significant enough? Please advise, as we have received various comments from several editors pertaining to the entry reading like an advertisement, and we've stripped the article down and tried to cite sources. Thanks so much --Ekubany (talk) 15:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Basically I feel as though this article is an advertisement for the business, but not written as such. I'm not an expert in the subject of interior design, but listing the owners' work as well just doesn't make sense. I just don't feel like it is notable and it seems like others have also noticed that. If you want, you can go ahead and create it but that doesn't mean that someone somewhere down the line won't attempt to delete it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:05, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Never Miss a Super Bowl Club

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:04, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I see you got it through, great job. --Guerillero | My Talk 19:02, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. This must be some sort of record considering one of the ones above took a whole month before it went through. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:05, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Karkadann at DYK

Hey Kevin, I expanded the article. Please have another look, and consider helping me tweak the hook (see the remark I made at DYK). Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 13 February 2011



This is the second issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed.


  • Userboxes and profiles - Add an ambassador userbox to your page, and make sure you've added your mentor profile!
  • Be a coordinating ambassador - Pick and class and make sure no students fall through the cracks.
  • New screencasts - Short videos on watchlists and a number of other topics may be useful to students.
  • Updates from Campus Ambassadors - Ambassadors are starting to report on classroom experiences, both on-wiki and on the Google Group.
  • Other news - There's a new on-wiki application for being an Online Ambassador, and Editing Friday #2 is today!
  • Things you can do - This is just a sample; if you're eager for something to do, there's plenty more.

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:23, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Personal comments

Making edits is one thing, placing personal comments with them is both childish and immature.. please keep them to yourself and then you won't be irritating.... enjoy :)Bwmoll3 (talk) 06:10, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

The thing is, you still haven't addressed my issue about why you were reverting them. If you were basing it off of the edit summary, then stop because reverting for something that minor is dumb. There is no rule that I also know of which bans being candid in edit summaries as well.

14 Test Squadron / 14th Missile Warning Squadron

Hey, I was wondering if I could explain my redirect of the article. Basically, it duplicates the other article in the crucial ways. On top of this, I feel as though having one good article is better than two separate articles. Finally, the real reasoning behind my merger is that this is the same unit. If you look at my reasoning on T:TDYK, you will see what I mean since I am not going to say all of this again. I would also like to continue discussion there but I am honestly suprised that The Bushranger didn't merge it before I did. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:58, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Here’s little background on why I created two separate articles. Wiki-Oregon had more red-links to the 14th MWS than any other un-written article—which is why I decided to research and write article about that unit. Wiki-Calif and Wiki-Maine projects also had red-links to 14th MWS. It was active duty unit engaged in 24/7 Cold War ops with hundreds of troops located around the country--clearly something that needed to be written about. By contrast, 14th TS Test only has 29 troops when they’re fully manned, all located at Colorado Springs; and the only red-link to 14th TS was on a wiki-list of all AF test unit. When I discovered heritage link between the two units I considered consolidating them into single article, but because 14th MWS was far more interesting and important, I decided on two separate articles. That way readers interested in MWS could read about that historic unit without having to read about its successor sqdn. My goal was to offer readers opportunity to read about either unit without forcing them to read all about the other as part of the deal. In any case, you did nice job merging the two articles so I'll leave things alone. However, there were different Wiki-project groups on the two Discussion pages—Wiki-Colorado for 14th TS and Wiki-Oregon, Wiki-Calif, and Wiki-Maine for 14th MWS (wiki-projects with known red-links to 14th MWS). You may want to consider moving those Wiki-project tags over to 14th TS Discussion page—on the other hand, those wiki-projects may not be interested since they don’t have any red-links to 14th TS. Your call whether tags should be moved or not.--Orygun (talk) 06:24, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh shoot, I forgot to do that. I also know that having a ton of "Military in X" categories for places that are no longer hosting the unit is quite weird so I really don't know what to do from there then. I can get onto fixing the rest of this later today though so there should not be a lot of mistakes in the end. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:26, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Doubt if any wiki-groups beside Wiki-Colorado will be interested in 14th TS, even if there is some text about another unit that was once located in thier focus area; but like I said, its your call.--Orygun (talk) 15:44, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't think that the redirect is going to hurt anyone. If we had a page for every name change, there would be another few thousand or so articles that would have to be made for military articles like this. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:33, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK Review Request

This DYK I nominated seemed to get passed up. would you please review it. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 01:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Done. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
thank you --Guerillero | My Talk 01:41, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Satie's Gnossiennes 1, 2, and 3
Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured sound status, File:Satie_-_Gnossienne_1.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for finding this. It's a superb recording. Shame about the ambiguous copyright status on the later ones, but, meh, it happens. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

{{Skiing and Snowboarding-stub}}

Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature.

In the case of this particular template, you didn't actually create it, but you changed both its name and scope. Given that stub templates are run uniformly across the entirety of Wikipedia, the renaming of one WikiProject doesn't really affect either the scope or name of specific stub templates which may relate to it. Unfortunately, the name of this template was changed to one which runs strongly against WP:WSS naming conventions, and normal practice would have been simply to propose a second template for snowboarding, rather than lumping the two subjects together with one template. Grutness...wha? 10:19, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 16:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Mentoring students: be sure to check in on them

This message is going out to all of the Online Ambassadors who are, or will be, serving as mentors this term.

Hi there! This is just a friendly reminder to check in on what your mentees are doing. If they've started making edits, take a look and help them out or do some example fixes for them, if they need it. And if they are doing good, let them know it!

If you aren't mentoring anyone yet, it looks like you will be soon; at least one large class is asking us to assign mentors for them, and students in a number of others haven't yet gotten to asking ambassadors to be their mentors, but may soon. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank You!

The Featured Sound Main Page Proposal Voter Barnstar
I was truly humbled by the overwhelming community support for the recent proposal to place featured sounds on the main page. The proposal closed on Tuesday with 57 people in support and only 2 in opposition.

It should take a few weeks for everything to get coded and tested, and once that is done the community will be presented with a mock up to assess on aesthetic appeal.

Finally, I invite all of you to participate in the featured sounds process itself. Whether you're a performer, an uploader, or just come across a sound file you find top quality, and that meets the featured sound criteria, you can nominate it at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Featured sounds is also looking for people to help assess candidates (also at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates.)

Thanks again for such a strong showing of support, and I hope to see you at featured sounds in the future.
Sven Manguard Wha?
Adam Cuerden (talk)
(X! · talk)

DYK nomination of Pleasure Dissociative Orgasmic Disorder

Hello! Your submission of Pleasure Dissociative Orgasmic Disorder at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

See comments here. Materialscientist (talk) 07:43, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Editing Fridays article for 24 February 2011

--Guerillero | My Talk 00:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits/latest

Hi. Sorry for removing those image links - I read it wrong and didn't see that you'd only just added them and were probably still working on them. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

It's really okay. I usually add them so I can remember them later. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:24, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Update

Hey KTR101, sorry I have been so busy with my classes at MSU...the topic I have chosen for my project is Idaho State VS. Tinno, 1972. Basically it was a ruling against the tribe that they couldn't fish...just a quick glimpse of what its about. I am going to start working on my writing in my sandbox. Will keep you posted with my progress..

Thanks, KK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kawasak.kid (talk • contribs) 01:02, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll be sure to follow your edits this week as well. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Pleasure Dissociative Orgasmic Disorder

Hello! Your submission of Pleasure Dissociative Orgasmic Disorder at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NW (Talk) 01:42, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

stats

Hi. nice charts you've added at WP:EDITS, I've moved them slightly and it would be helpful to add a date in the captions. However I suspect the Pie slices are wrong. The editors in the 3001 to 4,000 group all have roughly 11,000 to 14,000 edits, whilst the 2001 - 3,000 group have between 14 and 20 thousand. So the pie slice for the 3001 to 4,000 group must be more than half the size of the 2001 - 3,000 group. I suspect the ratio is closer to 5-7 but your pie chart is more like 1-7. Would you mind checking that your systems successfully loaded all 4,000 records and didn't some how discard the editors who were between circa 3,200 and 4,000 on the list? Thanks ϢereSpielChequers 13:24, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think we're missing anyone there. I basically added up all the numbers in an Excel spreadsheet and came up with the results. It's actually incredibly easy to do so anyone can check me on it. I do think the numbers are correct though because in two weeks, the highest group added something like a million and a half edits, which is quite impressive in its own right. In terms of the captions, I will update the graph the next time the numbers come out so that there is a better number spread. If you want to add up the numbers, I used MZM's spread. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Kevin, I have checked it, and I'm sure your figures are out when I check the 3rd and 4th tranches. ϢereSpielChequers 18:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Are you saying they're off or correct, I'm now confused. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I'll check now. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, the other three tranches looked right to me, so it may just be an error in that fourth tranche. ϢereSpielChequers 14:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, the new charts look OK to me. It would be nice to add dates and if you update them again, perhaps after we add the 4001-5000 range, I was wondering if you could do a separate pie slice for bot edits? ϢereSpielChequers 13:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
I could, and yes I really left a lot of this open for the fact that I'm hoping we'll add those remaining souls someday. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 14:44, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
OK I think the transclusion model gives us the potential to extend the list quite radically, though I may be quite incremental in doing this. I also think we need to publicise this via the signpost so as to give people the chance to opt out before we extend it. Any objection to my including your graphs in a signpost article? ϢereSpielChequers 15:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Go right ahead and use them. I really have no objection to using them as I released them into the public domain when I published them. If you need me to write anything explaining why I decided to do them, I can also do that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm drafting something at Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-03-06/Editcountitis, your input would be welcome, I've given you a co-credit as the guy who did the stats. ϢereSpielChequers 21:34, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Kev, the graphs don't render very well (as a result of being bitmap images embedded in vectors!); could you please either upload them as .png (which they should be) or convert to .svg? I'd be happy to do either for you if you like. sonia♫ 22:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Kevin, you might find that most active is a less controversial description than top... Also I was going to put some stuff in about the decreasing share of edits from the 4,000 - if you look at wp:EDITS there are old references to it being much larger. But that rather jibes with the tone of your quote. I'm now offline fora bit but I was thinking of adding a bit about some of our breakpoints, in particular the dramatic increase in in the 100k club since early 2010. ϢereSpielChequers 14:54, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
PS I've had a query at User_talk:WereSpielChequers#Editcountis something about an x axis. ϢereSpielChequers 22:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
The problem with "most active" is it might give the impression we're talking about Wikipedians with the most edits within the last 30 days (incidentally updated a year ago). That's my opinion though but I do think it could use a better title, whatever people think that might be. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Whale

Template:Whale has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. 208.115.91.242 (talk) 20:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Please be the mentor for the students working on Direct lobbying

Hi Kevin! I'm currently trying to assign mentors to all the remaining groups in Professor Obar's class. Would you be the mentor for the group of students working on Direct lobbying (not yet created)? Since you have a political science background, I thought the topic might be of interest. If you can do it, thanks! If not, please let me know.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 00:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

How many minions are we talking about here? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassador Program

Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:22, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Pleasure Dissociative Orgasmic Disorder

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:43, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Interesting DYK, but just a comment: per the naming conventions, the original title of the article should have been Pleasure dissociative orgasmic disorder and the new title should be Sexual anhedonia - neither of them are proper nouns. I have filed a request to move Sexual Anhedonia to Sexual anhedonia over the redirect. Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 14:50, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Go ahead. We also need to fix that redirect on the main page as well. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:26, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Marking articles students are working on

Howdy, Online Ambassador!

This is a quick message to all the ambassadors about marking and tracking which articles students are working on. For the classes working with the ambassador program, please look over any articles being worked on by students (in particular, any ones you are mentoring, but others who don't have mentors as well) and do these things:

  1. Add {{WAP assignment | term = Spring 2011 }} to the articles' talk pages. (The other parameters of the {{WAP assignment}} template are helpful, so please add them as well, but the term = Spring 2011 one is most important.)
  2. If the article is related to United States public policy, make sure the article the WikiProject banner is on the talk page: {{WikiProject United States Public Policy}}
  3. Add Category:Article Feedback Pilot (a hidden category) to the article itself. The second phase of the Article Feedback Tool project has started, and this time we're trying to include all of the articles students are working on. Please test out the Article Feedback Tool, as well. The new version just deployed, so any bug reports or feedback will be appreciated by the tech team working on it.

And of course, don't forget to check in on the students, give them constructive feedback, praise them for positive contributions, award them {{The WikiPen}} if they are doing excellent work, and so on. And if you haven't done so, make sure any students you are mentoring are listed on your mentor profile.

Thanks! --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 18:12, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

wikilawyering

In principle, according to Wikipedia:Speedy_keep#What_is_not_a_speedy-keep, it seems to me that you should have closed with WP:SNOW in the Libya NFZ AfD. The case for WP:SNOW seems overwhelming, about 24 keep to 3 delete + a few "other". Now that you've done it, i'm not sure there's any point changing - unless there's a worry about the precedent of a non-admin applying speedy keep when it should be snow. i'm not complaining here, i'm just pointing out what i read in the guideline. It's the first time i've seen a non-admin AfD closure (AFAIR), so i clicked on the link that you kindly provided. :) Boud (talk) 19:09, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Generally I view an early close as anything happening within the first few days of the start of it. Because of the fact that it was almost over, I figured closing it a few hours early wouldn't hurt anyone. To me, a speedy keep is generally something I use within those first few days when there is a clearly lopsided vote in favor of keep. Actually, I also used a script to do all of that and it makes life a lot easier. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey, Kevin, I dropped by to offer a similar message. You should only close something as "speedy keep" if it meets the specific criteria that allow it. It's a common misconception, but it's not a subjective or general term at all. You should use "SNOW keep" or "Snowball keep" or something like that. I don't consider closing a lopsided discussion a few hours early an 'early close' at all. No need to be bureaucratic, right? Anyway, just a procedural note, no big deal. Swarm X 07:32, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:10, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

User:MZMcBride/Sandbox 3

This will get overwritten by the bot every week. Probably makes sense to switch to a header template or something wherever that list is being copied to/transcluded. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:46, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. By the way, is there any way that we can get the bot to update the master list every week so we don't have discrepancies in data? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
That poses (or perhaps posed) political problems. I'm not sure what the current situation is. I just know that there was a specific reason that a user sandbox was used instead of a project-space page. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
If you're talking about having a project page with a master list, we have one and people are updating it with your bot's data every so often. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME

FYI, virtually all of the moves you have made to CFB articles (Canadian Forces Base ___) have been reverted. I prefer Official names most of the time, but only when WP:COMMONNAME doesn't take precedence. Ng.j (talk) 00:08, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I noticed a few months ago, and I really don't feel like starting a war over this. I probably could go at it again and defend myself, but I would need others to help me. What I enjoy is that no one is fixing the main template and that's creating a ton of redirects. People seem to assume that because it is an ex-British colony, all of the bases are going to follow some sort of naming convention. The thing is, even the signs outside of the base are "Canadian Forces Base..." and that is pretty damn official in my opinion. If you want to help defend this, I would be more than willing to move everything back again. Thanks for the notice though as I really appreciate it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:10, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
I concur that Canadian Forces Base *** is official, but in this case WP:COMMONNAME makes sense, as nobody uses the full designation unless it is in official documentation. EVERYONE in the CF uses CFB, and the media has picked up on that as well. As long as it appears in the article I think it is fine. I have already reverted the Canadian Forces Base template.
As a general rule, you should check before making such large, wholescale changes. Usually things are the way they are for a reason. Ng.j (talk) 01:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Ugh, I'll have to sort this out someday by conducting some sort of straw poll on the Military History project. Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ktr101. You have new messages at La Pianista's talk page.
Message added 02:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Editing Fridays article for 25 March

--Guerillero | My Talk 17:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 21 March 2011



This is the third issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed.


Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:24, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

MBTA South Coast Rail

Regarding South Coast Rail, I just wanted to point out that "South Coast Rail" is not the name of a new line, it is just the name of the project to extend the Commuter Rail from Stoughton south. Grk1011 (talk) 19:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I know, I've been incorporating that into the articles as I've written them. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok just checking because I felt like North Easton (MBTA station) was written in a way that says that. Grk1011 (talk) 20:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
It probably was. I realized this around the time that I punched out the article and I just saw that it does read like that so I'll go tackle that now. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

RE: 'name fixing in preparation to move' Old Guard article

Just curious as to what you meant in the edit summary by 'preparation to move'. The article has been moved back and forth several times in the past few years, and the current location is where I moved it to the last time it was moved somewhere else. Since this has been a rather contentious issue in the past -- requiring, among other things, mediation -- I would ask that before moving it anywhere, you bring the issue up on here. Thank you. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 06:45, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I actually can't do anything except move it to some unique title. Furthermore, there should be no abbreviations in the name anyways so it shouldn't be there in the first place. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:59, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, not only are abbreviations perfectly suitable for Wikipedia articles, that's how the Administrators who mediated the case two years ago agreed the article was best named. As a former member of The Old Guard, the abbreviation '(TOG)' is normally what appears as part of the official name. It doesn't need to be moved again, and this is a unique title. I realize that you're relatively new to this particular article, but there's a group of editors who have been maintaining this page for several years now and have gone through long drawn out discussions on the naming conventions. It's a unique unit in the US Army, so there is a certain latitude for such conventions. Please leave it where it's at. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 19:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I figured as much as I read over the talk page a bit, just on a whim actually. Oh well, maybe I'll see what others think in a few years and conduct some sort of poll then. Thanks for your information! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

John T. Olson

Hi there, I was reviewing your new article at WP:DYN and I think we have a problem. To me, it seems like the article is a close paraphrasing of the Cape Cod Times obituary. The order of sentences are identical, just a few words here and there have been changed. It is virtually impossible to "cut and paste" and then change an article - you really have to start from scratch your self. Please review the WP:COPYVIO and WP:PARAPHRASE guidelines and rewrite the article to avoid infringing on the copywrite status. I will check again in a couple of days, but I don't think it qualifies for DYK in it's current state. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 16:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

You may have missed this message, but are you going to rewrite the article to ensure that isn't too close to the newspaper obituary?The-Pope (talk) 15:50, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
I apparently did. I actually opened the nomination page and saw that I had new messages then saw your response there. I'll get around to it soon as a few more sources might have popped up by now. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:54, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Bosnian Genocide

Please see Talk:Bosnian Genocide#ktr101 invitation. You made a bold edit that was reverted. As it was reverted, the page "International response to the Bosnian Genocide " was a content fork of the information contained in the Bosnian Genocide article, so I speedily deleted it under "A10 Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic". If after discussion on Talk:Bosnian Genocide there is a consensus move the information out into another article only then should such an article be created. -- PBS (talk) 22:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

As you have already found out, PBS is the self-appointed authority on what is or is not a content fork at Bosnian Genocide. He does not always bother to check that there is a consensus before he reaches his decisions. You have probably realised that you have found yourself in a situation which is almost an impasse but in which as Fairview360 notes, there are signs of slow progress. If you have the stomach to stick it out your presence and contributions will be appreciated. And the situation's not entirely negative. Encountering persistent intractability does push you into pursuing a closer understanding of the issues. Opbeith (talk) 20:32, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

This actually doesn't suprise me much as we always seem to have article issues in the Balkans region. I'll stick it out, but if I ever don't reply within a few days, please by all means feel free to remind me. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism warning

Welcome to Wikipedia. A page you recently created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests, and consider using the Article Wizard. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. Syrthiss (talk) 18:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

It was a joke! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
;) Syrthiss (talk) 12:00, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Make sure that you are checking in on your students work for WP:USPP/C/11/PTE

Hey, just a happy reminder to make sure that you are regularly checking in on your mentees work for JMU'S Technical editing class, Sadads (talk) 11:14, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Way ahead of you. My user hasn't actually edited since the third week of February so I don't know what's up there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:22, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

CCI Notice

Hello, Ktr101. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. For some suggestions on responding, please see Responding to a CCI case. Thank you. Cunard (talk) 06:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Anne Elizabeth Moore

In your edit summary, your citation includes 'subject appears to be a non-notable person'. May I suggest a more neutral & less off-putting 'subject's notability has not been established'? Article creators are less likely to take offense, and the AfD process they're likely to face is stressful enough. Cheers. Dru of Id (talk) 16:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

It is an automated edit summary which I have no control over. Additionally, the user actually threatened legal action and blackmail against me over e-mail after I declined it so I don't think that they were emotionally harmed by that summary, just angry. Note a notice that they placed on the page after I declined it which essentially questioned my intelligence. I encouraged them in a reply to work on it and it seems like they did so I think that this entire issue is dead now. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Article Requests

Hi Kevin..any chance you could start articles on Richard T. Swope and Chester L. Eby? I'd do it myself, but I'm limited in time at the moment. Swope Bio [4] Death Notices [5] [6]/ Eby info: [7] [8]. Thanks! Connormah (talk) 04:10, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you want an article or just complete copying of the information into an article? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:12, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Your choice, thanks in advance, I appreciate it. Connormah (talk) 04:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
It might take a few days as I am currently destroying some category issues at the moment, ones which are incidentally Air Force related. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
No problem. Connormah (talk) 02:00, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Unrelated, but I just started up an article on William E. Thurman - any chance you can think of a good DYK hook for him? I'd like to get it to DYK. Connormah (talk) 04:46, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
If you didn't copy it, then yes. I created a helluva drama back at the end of last year when I made over twenty articles by pasting text already there and they didn't accept them. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:57, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Probably best not to, on second thought - I did originally copy it and switch things around, plus add a couple things. Connormah (talk) 04:59, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Stripping cats

I noticed that you have been stripping categories off USAF articles. Most of these are undercategorized, so I am a bit puzzled. It looks like you are untagging USAF units that are no longer active, but I don't recall any prior discussion or consensus to that effect. Ng.j (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm pulling out higher level categories since there are more specific ones already there. For example, "...units of the United States Air Force" is being pulled out since "...wings/groups/squadrons of the United States Air Force" already are there, making the first category unneeded. Having the former categories there just makes it redundant and it just serves to confuse people. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:14, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Makes sense. You have my support if you need it. Ng.j (talk) 19:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:38, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 22 April 2011



This is the fourth issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed.


Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:34, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

typo

Hi, Kevin. Just thought you would like to know that you have a typo in the header of File:Top_Wikipedians_compared_to_the_rest_of_the_community.png. It says "Compated," not "Compared."--Mike Selinker (talk) 09:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll get right on fixing that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:41, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Wait, another user did that. I'm planning on fixing the chart soon though as there are more things to be added but that will probably be Friday at the earliest. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:53, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I see now. I will ping User:Sven Manguard too.--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
All fixed by Sven Manguard.--Mike Selinker (talk) 19:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

My Deep Apologies

Hi Ktr, Do you know about Man of I-Mages? That's actully my account. But since it was created during my blocked period, it's obviously a sockpuppet. I know what I did what foolish and I am sorry for it. I know the penalty of a sockpuppet is indefinite block, but can I at least be forgiven for what wrong I did? If not, don't put any pressure on yourself, there are better sites then Wikipedia I can work for. Regards, Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 01:56 26 April 2011 (UTC)

At this point, it was over a year and a half ago and you also admitted to it. I don't think you'll be blocked on the main account as you probably didn't understand at the time the consequences. Another administrator who watches my talk will probably see this and block it anyways but I don't think you have anything to worry about at this point. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Cough

You might want to sign this. ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:44, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 04:00, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

USAF articles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history#Abbreviations_of_USAF_units

Need your help here. Ng.j (talk) 21:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm on it! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

What were you thinking?

Why in the world would you remove the categories related to American special forces, CIA operations and Naval special forces, etc., from Death of Osama bin Laden? As such a well established editor you should know better! AlaskaMike (talk) 05:55, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Because the operation article supercedes that one. Redundancy in that respect will only serve to confuse the reader. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Redundant categories confusing the reader? Seriously? I've looked through your edits and your a very well established, good faith editor. But this edit was not so cool. Cats repeated in multiple articles aren't going to confuse anybody... AlaskaMike (talk) 06:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
What I meant essentially is that having a category like, "Central Intelligence Agency operations", "Obama Administration initiatives", "Operations involving American special forces", and "United States Naval Special Warfare Command" are all redundant if there is a page located at another location which is actually about those operations. Additionally, the last one shouldn't even be there as it has nothing to do with the command except for the fact that it was an operation by it. A lot of articles have categories that really shouldn't be there because they only serve to overpopulate a category which should have relevant, not really distantly related pages in them. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 13:34, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Please help assess articles for Public Policy Initiative research

Hi Ktr101/Archive 4,

Your work as an Online Ambassador is making a big contribution to Wikipedia. Right now, we're trying to measure just how much student work improves the quality of Wikipedia. If you'd like contribute to this research and get a firsthand look at the quality improvement that is happening through the project, please sign up to assess articles. Assessment is happening now, just use the quantitative metric and start assessing! Your help would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 17:12, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do but it is unlikely I'll be able to do anything over the next few days as I am tackling a few essay assignments. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Please take the Wikipedia Ambassador Program survey

Hi Ambassador,

We are at a pivotal point in the development of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program. Your feedback will help shape the program and role of Ambassadors in the future. Please take this 10 minute survey to help inform and improve the Wikipedia Ambassadors.

WMF will de-identify results and make them available to you. According to KwikSurveys' privacy policy: "Data and email addresses will not be sold, rented, leased or disclosed to 3rd parties." This link takes you to the online survey: http://kwiksurveys.com?u=WPAmbassador_talk

Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments, Thank You!

Amy Roth (Research Analyst, Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 20:40, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Template:Deadliest US tornadoes

I didn't realize you had gone in and replaced all the links, or I would have waited before reverting. Someone had since reduced the list to 15, and someone commented on why it wasn't just 10, so there seems to be some opposition to having all 25 deadliest tornadoes on every page, instead of two separate templates, The top 10 for 1-10, and The top 25 for 11-25. I don't see why there can't be two...I like the idea of less clutter. Regardless, there's discussion at Template talk:10 deadliest US tornadoes about this template. -RunningOnBrains(talk) 14:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I actually found it quite funny that the same user created both of them, a day apart. What's even better is that they stayed separate for almost five years. I actually modified the template before finding the other one and I then replaced the one that had the few issues with the other one. Thanks for the notification, though! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

CCI pages

Hi. I'm moving the CCI pages back where they originally were placed. They were not placed under those numbers randomly, but in sensitivity to those who edited under their real names. I appreciate your assistance in the area, but before changing established practices, we do need to reach consensus for that. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:03, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I am really sorry for messing that up. I checked the page history of some of these to see if they were moved to there to do such a thing and since I didn't see anything, I assumed that it would be alright to do so. Again, sorry about that! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Understood. Again, I do appreciate your assistance in the area. They were opened at the numbers to begin with out of concern for that when some contributors (not subjects of CCIs themselves) raised concerns that there could be real-world ramifications. Some CCI subjects are blatantly ignoring policy/law, but a good many of them seem to be operating under good faith. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:01, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:57, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for 2011 New England tornado outbreak, 1995 Great Barrington tornado

I have added 1995 Great Barrington tornado to your nomination and stricken your original, single-article hook. However, you need to do another review for the new article. Cheers! Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
I have reviewed your second article and just have a small request before I approve it. You need to cite the fact that three people were killed in the Barrington Tornado directly. Everything else checks out. Once that is finished please respond at T:TDYK Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:32, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

My RfA

I just wanted to take a minute to thank you very much for supporting me in my recent RfA. Even though it was unsuccessful, I appreciate your trust. With much gratitude, jsfouche ☽☾Talk 02:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Crotched Mountain Ski & Ride Area

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Crotched Mountain Ski & Ride Area, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://dbpedia.org/page/Crotched_Mountain.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh nice. Apparently there was an issue on the page and I walked right into that one when I split it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Wait a second...it's a mirror page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Angel Delgadillo

Calmer Waters 00:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC) 18:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for 2011 New England tornado outbreak

Materialscientist (talk) 18:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for 1995 Great Barrington tornado

Materialscientist (talk) 18:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Charles River Speedway

Materialscientist (talk) 06:28, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

102nd flying drug smuggler

You don't explain what happened to this plane. Was it forced to land? Shot down? Crashed? Would be good to clarify. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:18, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look at it later. I might have to dig up something but I'll try to see what happened. I don't think the source honestly said anything but I'll have a look at it to see what's there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
The source itself is archived. I'm not paying a subscription fee to access it though but I can almost guarantee that the plane was forced to land (based on interceptions that still go on with other plane scenarios), even though it probably wasn't in the news article. It wouldn't have been shot down as it would've been controversial, a crash would have been mentioned, and allowing it to go free probably didn't occur. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Kevin. I suggest you rewrite this section somehow to make it less ambiguous/clearer, or do some more research, before you put this article up for another review. Just my 2 cents. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 03:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I'll look at it sometime. Thanks for the random advice! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:07, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject United States History

Greetings, It was recently suggested that WikiProject United States History might be inactive or semiactive and that it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States.

I have started a discussion and will contact each of the active members for their comments and input on the suggestion. Please take a moment and add your comments to the discussion or feel free to contact me if you have any questions. --Kumioko (talk) 19:43, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

US National Archives collaboration

 United States National Archives WikiProject
Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts.

There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

RPP

Left you a note at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#.7B.7Bla.7CConnectU.7D.7D. Drmies (talk) 05:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't get that until now but you might have a point there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:23, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Cape Cod

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:North Truro Air Force Station site map.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:North Truro Air Force Station site map.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Norma Lyon

Materialscientist (talk) 08:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Adoption

Are you still adopting? I'm new to wikipedia and looking to be adopted so i can make some useful edits without them being removed! Help appreciated :) KerioBerry (talk) 13:19, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I always am. I'm a bit busy today, but I'll try to start advising you tomorrow. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

That's great! Thank you KerioBerry (talk) 07:57, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

A lovely spot of tea for you sir!

All right chap! Here's the finest Earl Grey tea in the west for your enjoyment. Juliancolton (talk) 17:20, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Aww. Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:20, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Re:Your Help

Hi thanks for getting back to me! Basically I made my first edit on the Olswang wiki page and it was removed y two editors. One stated the reason was because of a broke citation? I'm not really sure what that means. The other because the point was purely promotional and not sourced. (I was unaware you could source back to the business' website at this point which was why I hadn't referenced the point he referred to) I made what I thought were appropriate seconday links and wiki links to make it as unpromotional as possible!? So i'm not sure how to correct the posts? Do they need re-writing to not be 'promotional', the citation links and sourcing? As the editors just removed the posts instead of correcting them and didn't giver me detail as to how do correct them i'm not sure what to do! Thanks KerioBerry (talk) 10:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll respond on your talk page to keep the discussion there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:54, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Apiary Laboratory

The article Apiary Laboratory you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Apiary Laboratory for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:29, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Muchos gratsiatso

Many thanks, and you may also be interested in this yourself. Not GA quality, but it's one more for project UMass.--Ken (talk) 23:38, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that looks amazing! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:51, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

This was about as close as I could get to ice cream... – GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:58, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Aww, thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:00, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Worcester State Hospital main administration building.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Worcester State Hospital main administration building.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jeff Mellinger

Thanks for this contribution to free knowledge Victuallers (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:23, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Boston

Hi to you too; thanks for the virtual beer. I stayed on for several days in Boston, so don't worry, I managed to find time for bars - especially Cheers!

I just got back to the UK yesterday.

So...yes, I'm sure we'll be in touch again, re. either Educational things, or alcoholic things. Or, best of all, both.

Nice to have met you. Take care -  Chzz  ►  23:37, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you kindly

Thank you for your support
Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. I shall endeavor to meet your and the community's expectations as an admin. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:41, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Ambassador Program: assessment drive

Even though it's been quiet on-wiki, the Wikipedia Ambassador Program has been busy over the last few months getting ready for the next term. We're heading toward over 80 classes in the US, across all disciplines. You'll see courses start popping up here, and this time we want to match one or more Online Ambassadors to each class based on interest or expertise in the subject matter. If you see a class that you're interested, please contact the professor and/or me; the sooner the Ambassadors and professors get in communication, the better things go. Look for more in the coming weeks about next term.

In the meantime, with a little help I've identified all the articles students did significant work on in the last term. Many of the articles have never been assessed, or have ratings that are out of date from before the students improved them. Please help assess them! Pick a class, or just a few articles, and give them a rating (and add a relevant WikiProject banner if there isn't one), and then update the list of articles.

Once we have updated assessments for all these articles, we can get a better idea of how quality varied from course to course, and which approaches to running Wikipedia assignments and managing courses are most effective.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Middle Georgia Raceway

The DYK project (nominate) 06:57, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I was surprised to see the article on the main page in DYK. I wish I had more time to watch for the new incoming articles. The article had very little mention of its NASCAR race history which is a major topic to a lot of readers. So I doubled the size of the content in the article and reorganized it. Please edit as you see fit (of course). I don't like doing that while its on the main page but I had no choice. I suggest that next time when you work on an article that clearer falls into an active WikiProject that you should ask for help with that portion of the topic (if you don't cover it yourself). Then you'll get a much more complete article to present on the main page. I would have asked for DYK credit but I guess it's too late. Royalbroil 12:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
I haven't been necessarily free of late as I have been volunteering in Kentucky at a convention and before that I was working overtime at work. In response to your main page thing, I have always encouraged editing of articles on the main page as the increased viewership tends to lead to more edits which help to improve the article over time. Thanks for the other advice though as I will try to remember that the next time I jump into a vague topic like that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Request for Adoption

I have seen your notice in the 'Adopt a user' page. I am wondering if you still accept adoptions. If so, can you please adopt me? I am a bit of an inexperienced editor of Wikipedia, with only about 300 edits to date. I am yet to make a complete, major article by myself. I generally make edits only to expand articles and to do copyediting. Miguel AG (talk) 16:12, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I can do that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! How does this work? If I need any help, do I just post a question in your talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miguel AG (talk • contribs) 10:17, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Sure, because other editors can chime in as well should I miss something. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:02, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Boston

Hi Kevin. I am nearly comatose as a contributor in some respects, especially when it involves roads. I left the roads project and don't bother with the roads pages much at all, in spite of having started a few, and mapped many, article topics. You on the other hand have a very active recent editing history as you mention on your page, so I am not here to do any challenging, far from it. I only want to point out one thing, which involves the template I created, {{Boston Road Transportation}}. Please, see the talk page regarding the scope of that template. It was and is restricted to only roads, streets and structures within Boston, with the exceptions of Memorial Drive and Route 128/I-95 and some of the "see also" articles which are so integral to "Boston Road Transportation" and close enough that they really should be included. However, the scope of what you changed the title to, "Greater Boston", presents so much room for interpretation, and so much room for debate, that it was purposefully not used as the title or scope of that particular template when it was formed. Immediately, due in part to the varying definitions of "greater", the template scope becomes overly large and ambiguous with the addition of the word "greater". In my view, and that of many involved in the creation of the template and consensus surrounding it, the focus should remain on the bridges, streets, parkways, history and limited number of state highways within the city proper, again with those two exceptions. So, I have undone your edit of the template title. My previous comments on the template talk page suggested that the highways of Boston's "Technology Belt" could receive a template, or "Eastern Massachusetts" could have one which dealt specifically with the dozens of state highways and other notable roads here. However, that template is not about anything other than the city itself and its immediate road infrastructure. Thank you for taking the time to read this, I hope you will agree with me that the template should maintain a Boston city proper focus. Thanks – Sswonk (talk) 02:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll respond more after I crash for the night, but I agree with you somewhat. I'll elaborate more tomorrow when I'm not at risk for making no sense. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:02, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lethal Lady

The article Lethal Lady has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to be notable every aircraft type has one aircraft that has the most hours it appears not to have done anything else of note, at the most a one liner in the F-16 article. This was PRODed in 2008, but tag was removed without a reason being specified.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DexDor (talk) 20:23, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Your DYK review of List of the largest libraries in the United States

Hi KTR, I have expanded the list a bit (as has Neutrality). Could you give the result a quick once over and leave some comments at Template talk:Did you know/List of the largest libraries in the United States? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'll go do it right now. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 14:04, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Hello Mr.Ktr101

This is Skylark2008.A few weeks back I had started crooning on Wikipedia for creating a portal to Itelligence [information-collection] topics.Fortunately Mr Sven-Manguard took it up and through his able mediation it is now a part of the Military-history project.I appreciate the effort put together by so many smart people to prepare this important section[especially,given how much raw material we have here].However,I still believe that this topic ,while being an obvious sub-topic of Military history still merits its own portal or a least an outlines article where one can find the links to all the relevant articles under that heading.I am not well-conversant with the methods of doing these things.Could you or any other kind member be so good as to help me on this?At the same time ,I wish to be a part of the collaborative effort here.Also,please let me know what you gentlemen think on my proposals to-

  1. create a portal to intelligence[information-gathering] related topics.
  2. create an outlines article about intelligence[information-gathering] related topics.

Once again,thank you very much for this collaborative effort towards evolving this interesting topic on Wikipedia.Thanks and regards. Skylark2008 (talk) 16:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC)Skylark2008

Hey Skylark! I am not really an expert in this subject so I am going to direct others who are more knowledgable in the subject to this post. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:04, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
I checked up on the status of WikiProject Espionage nor WikiProject Intelligence. A merge with MilHist or with each other was discussed, but didn't happen (or didn't happen yet). Neither of those projects have large or active populations of editors, so I don't know what will happen, or when.
As for the portal, I may be able to work on it, but I don't know for sure. I thought I'd have the time, but the merge still hasn't happened, and I'm leaving the country soon.
Feel free to keep me in the loop, Sven Manguard Wha? 02:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you all for the efforts.Skylark2008 (talk) 16:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)Skylark2008

What should it be called?

Hello. I was pinged to come to this thread. It seems that the title "Outline of intelligence" (if it were to be created) should correspond with the subject intelligence. This raises the issue of what the outline for gathering information should be called. It also raises the question of where on Wikipedia's tree of knowledge this topic belongs — that is, what is its path? For example Outline of Algeria's path is Outline of geography/Outline of Africa/Outline of Algeria. Outline of cell biology is Outline of science/Outline of natural science (not created yet)/Outline of biology/Outline of cell biology.

"Outline of intelligence (information gathering)" would be an odd name for an outline, as we (so far) have been able to almost entirely avoid the use of parenthetical disambiguators in outline titles. But that title's subject {intelligence (information gathering)} doesn't even exist as an article name, and outlines usually correspond to an article on the same subject. The subject in question redirects to intelligence assessment. The actual subject, "intelligence gathering" itself redirects to List of intelligence gathering disciplines.

"Intelligence (information gathering)" and "intelligence gathering" mean the same thing. Their redirects should not lead to 2 different destinations!

If I'm not mistaken, "intelligence assessment" isn't the same thing as "intelligence gathering".

Why isn't there an article entitled "Intelligence gathering"?

Sincerely, The Transhumanist 22:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors: Time to join pods

Hello! If you're planning to be an active Online Ambassador for the upcoming academic term, now is the time to join one or more pods. (A pod consists of the instructor, the Campus Ambassadors, and the Online Ambassadors for single class.) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) explains the expectations for being part of a pod as an Online Ambassador. (The MOU for pods in Canada is essentially the same.) In short, the role of Online Ambassadors this term consists of:

  • Working closely with the instructor and Campus Ambassadors, providing advice and perspective as an experienced Wikipedian
  • Helping students who ask for it (or helping them to find the help they need)
  • Watching out for the class as a whole
  • Helping students to get community feedback on their work

This replaces the 1-on-1 mentoring role for Online Ambassadors that we had in previous terms; rather than being responsible for individual students (some of whom don't want or help or are unresponsive), Online Ambassadors will be there to help whichever students in their class(es) ask for help.

You can browse the upcoming courses here: United States; Canada. More are being added as new pods become active and create their course pages.

Once you've found a class that you want to work with—especially if you some interest or expertise in the topic area—you should sign the MOU listing for that class and get in touch with the instructor. We're hoping to have at least two Online Ambassadors per pod, and more for the larger classes.

If you're up for supporting any kind of class and would like me to assign you to a pod in need of more Online Ambassadors, just let me know.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:33, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

PS: There are still a lot of student articles from the last term that haven't been rated. Please rate a few and update the list!

Heads-up

Friendly note Just so you know, User:Ktr101/Articles is styled "top:-50px;", so some of these top icons are cut off at the top (on Firefox 3.x on Vista.) Maybe this is what you want, but it seems like you probably didn't want that... —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:56, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Nope! It appears as though it is meant to go above the edit link for those who have it enabled to edit the first section (myself included). I have yet to find something where I can fix that issue and remove all the extra DYK symbols. If you know of a userpage which does this, please feel free to tell me. I also use Internet Explorer (cue gasp) so I have yet to check compatibility with other versions of internet browsers. I just checked it though on Firefox 6, and everything appears to be working correctly with the only cutoff at my name. Thanks for the alert, though! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Question about photo

Hi Ktr101: Could you please take a look at the "discussion" at User talk:IZAK#File source problem with File:Pres GW Bush mounting jet.jpg concerning File:Pres GW Bush mounting jet.jpg, perhaps you could add your learned opinion in this matter and help resolve it in some way. Thanks in advance. IZAK (talk) 05:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Assassination of Benigno Aquino, Jr.

Hi Kevin, in May 2010 you contributed the article Assassination of Benigno Aquino, Jr. Unfortunately most of the important content in the article isn't properly sourced, and recently, most sections have been tagged for lack of references. Owing to a recent history of (what I consider to be damaging) edits to the article Benigno Aquino, Jr. I want to use some of the material that you've added to support the historical impact of Aquino's assassination, but I can't because AoBAJ isn't properly sourced. I lack the background to find the citations without spending far more time on it than I have available. So basically I'm just asking whether you would have the time to do some further work on your article, and perhaps even help to get Benigno Aquino, Jr. into a more resilient state. I fully understand that you may not have the time to do so. Best regards. Rubywine . talk 14:59, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Addiction to Mountain Dew for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Addiction to Mountain Dew is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Addiction to Mountain Dew until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ironholds (talk) 20:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

If you're not busy

...there's a bunch of redlinks at List of United States Navy four-star admirals. (thought I'd ask you as you did this for Air Force Generals last year) – Connormah (talk) 18:27, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah...I actually have a life at this point. Now that I know that there are a bunch of them, I'll probably have a go at them at some point in the future. I am doing a project right now that involves fixing up some Coast Guard pages that look quite horrible, but I'll tackle that page in the next few months or so. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:25, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Whenever you wish. Just thought I'd leave you a note since I recall you doing this in the past. Best, – Connormah (talk) 19:32, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Comm375

Hey - wanted to leave you a link to the course page Debaser42 (talk) 03:08, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

File:102nd Intelligence Wing emblem.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:102nd Intelligence Wing emblem.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:22, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Student greeting

Hello Kevin,

My name is Joanne Joujoute. I am a junior transfer student transferring into the University of Massachusetts Amherst. I am a student in Prof. Zach McDowell Writing As Communication course. I am a fairly new member to the Wikipedia family, and I would like to open a window opportunity to form a relationship with any and all Online Ambassadors regarding my contribution to the Wikipedia family. I look forward to hearing from you all!

Best,

Joujoute


Merge notice.

Just a heads up, when removing the merge tag on Battle of Monmouth, you should have removed the corresponding tag on Monmouth order of Battle as well. This means the merge categories get cleared up of old merge discussions. JoshuaJohnLee talk softly, please 18:00, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I forgot to this time. Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:59, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Interview with Wikimedia Foundation

Hi Ktr101, I hope you're well. My name is Aaron and I'm one of the Storytellers working on the 2011 fundraiser for the Wikimedia Foundation. For this year's campaign, we're interviewing as many of the very active and productive Wikipedians as we can to broaden the range of appeals we run come November. I wonder if you would want to tell me more about your experiences editing and writing here? If so, I'll ask you your personal story and I'll ask you some general questions about Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're interesting by emailing amuszalski@wikimedia.org. Thanks! user:Aaron (WMF)

Sure, although do you want to do a phone call as a lot of my Wikipedia story is already on my userpage and at this point, it would probably be more fun and candid if I did it via a phone call. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College dating

Um. Clearly going to be kept, but it might have been best to let a non-GEP related editor close that. There was enough evidence of a "cabal", so to speak, in the huge number of votes in a short period of time and the assertions of biting the newbies (well, apparently only the student newbies matter, since a lot of AfDs are much more bitey) without having a campus ambassador (and a non-admin to boot) close it. Just a thought. sonia♫ 23:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

True... Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:14, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Update on courses and ambassador needs

Hello, Ambassadors!

I wanted to give you one last update on where we are this term, before my role as Online Facilitator wraps up at the end of this week. Already, there are over 800 students in U.S. classes who have signed up on course pages this term. About 40 classes are active, and we're expecting that many more again once all the classes are up and running.

On a personal note, it's been a huge honor to work with so many great Wikipedians over the last 15 months. Thanks so much to everyone who jumped in and decided to give the ambassador concept a try, and double thanks those of you who were involved early on. Your ideas and insights and enthusiasm have been the foundation of the program, and they will be the keys the future of the program.

Courses looking for Online Ambassadors

Still waiting to get involved with a class this term, or ready to take on more? We have seven classes that are already active and need OA support, and eleven more that have course pages started but don't have active students yet. Please consider joining one or more of these pods!

Active courses that really need Online Ambassadors:

Courses that may be active soon that need Online Ambassadors:

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Completely improper AfD close

Please revert your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College dating, allow it to run for the full 7 days, and don't even consider closing it yourself. You can't speedy close something based on WP:SNOW when you know full well that all but one of the !votes was canvassed offsite via the Ambasssador's email list. Furthermore, you should not be the one to close the AfD, because you are yourself a part of the Ambassador program. This smacks of WP:INVOLVED every which way. Hell, one of the people !voting is the professor of the student who wrote the article! While the WMF has created the GEO to acquire more editors on university campuses, I never saw any indication that they intended to suspend all of the normal procedural and behavioral rules for editing done by students in these programs. If you do not revert your close and relist the AfD, I will take this to deletion review. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I am involved with the program. I went into that discussion with a completely neutral approach, though. Yes, the article was under contention, but the fact that it was being voted on with straight keeps in no way changes anything. I am involved with the program, but if I had stumbled across this as a completely uninvolved editor, I would have done the same thing. I am going to undo my closure, but only because I have talked to others who have advised me otherwise. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk:College_dating#Pictures

Thanks for your involvement with the article. Please see my comment about the pictures. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 03:21, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

College dating

Kevin, come on--that image is totally trivial! Drmies (talk) 20:50, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Fine, nuke it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ktr101/Archive_4&oldid=1191649065"