User talk:Marketdiamond/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Marketdiamond. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

History of Pittsburgh

Hi, I've started a new History of Pittsburgh page. I thought from your note about a project for Pittsburgh that you might want to help me out. Thanks. Tomcool 04:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello Marketdiamond/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Longhair | Talk 04:14, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Pasting articles from other webpages

Please don't page article content from other webpages. It is generally considered a copyright violation and will be deleted on the spot. You can learn about our copyright policy at Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ. I had to delete all of your Pittsburgh mayors for this reason with the exception of William W. Irwin — which was borderline copyvio but at least phrased things somewhat differently (I added the source you used on that page as well). Please don't do this in the future, because it puts Wikipedia in legal danger and is against our principle of creating a truly "free" encyclopedia (i.e. one which is not covered by restrictive copyrights). Thank you. --Fastfission 23:32, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Reply reguarding Irwin et. al.

Reply===================== Fastfission thanks for the message, my intent was not to leave those as "final" articles but to amend them after closing the window--can I do this on sandbox? I get errors everytime I open it (something about call the guards). I am trying to correlate information from about 4 different websites and so paper sources to do so efficently I need some "load" time (it would make it easier to copy that information for that mayor and then work from those notes to produce a unique and original description.) I was hoping sandbox could do it for me but it won't load?!

I agree that "cutting and pasting" for the FINAL article would be just bad ethics (again I am looking to "datadump" somehow and then close all windows and work at making my own original work but alas no sandbox--if sandbox even allows that), however I did want to know why Mayor Irwin is still "borderline" copyright. More then anything it is just a listing of facts, and as we all know you can not copyright a fact. If NBC ABC and CBS all reported that the President left Cleveland and is in route to Buffalo, kind of hard to make those things "original". Please clarify this for me, I am all for writing an original piece and phrasing it in a unique way but Tom Brokaw violates about five dozen copyrights all night, the President is flying to Buffalo . . . etc.

Road stubs

All of the following made their way to WP:SFD:

--Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:56, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Your recent edits on List of shopping malls

Yo dude:

I don't know if you noticed the "notable" limitation on this article, but it's really important or else this list is going to get way too long (please review the article's history to see what I mean). I hope you come up with some justifications for why those malls are notable in the next month or so, or I might have to chop a few. Please take a look at the California malls for examples of what is notable.

Pittsburgh is a seriously depressed metro area and it is highly unlikely that it could support such a large number of notable malls (implying that some of the ones you posted are non-notable).

If you have an issue with this, please reply on Talk:List of shopping malls. Thanks.

--Coolcaesar 11:25, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Holts

If your last name actually is Holt, we might be distantly related. My great-great-grandfather Holt came over from Oldham, Lancashire, in the early 1800s. He was kind of mysterious about the whole situation, so I'm guessing he was run out of town. :) Wahkeenah 02:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Peterson Events Centre, etc.

Hi. Regarding this article as well as Rubenstein Stadium, please mark them as stubs by pasting the following text into the bottom of the article (including braces):

{{stub}}

This will expand on the article page like so:

This article is a stub. You can help by expanding it.

This informs readers that the article still needs expansion. P.s. as with some of your other Pittsburgh related articles, it will be hard to justify keeping these two as they don't seem to be encyclopedic. You're either going to have to fill them out with substantial content or merge them with the main Pittsburgh article, or they will face deletion somewhere along the line. Zunaid 09:18, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Interstates

I'm not sure that in its current form it was very useful. Maybe something covering Pittsburgh transportation would be more useful - include the Amtrak station, the light rail, and the freeways. --SPUI (talk | don't use sorted stub templates!) 08:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd recommend doing only Interstates that actually go downtown. Or, if separate articles are written on the Penn-Lincoln Parkway West and the part north of downtown, link to those instead (maybe still link to I-279, but don't put it on the I-279 article?). (Penn-Lincoln Parkway East should redirect to I-376 - I'll do that now.) --SPUI (talk | don't use sorted stub templates!) 08:36, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

re: Re: Completely no idea . . . Steelers

As of now, I am removing the highlight colors. I and other users have completely no idea what are they suppose to mean. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 07:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

why are you such an annoying contributor? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.151.166.10 (talk • contribs) .

If you kindly check the history of this page, you will find that this edit was made by 141.151.166.10, not me. Apology accepted. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 09:20, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:376.PNG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:376.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:576.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

They have been replaced by SVG images. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 01:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:279.PNG and Image:579.PNG too. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 01:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Super Bowl articles

A reminder: when adding to the trivia sections on the Super Bowl articles, please do not add redundant or related content that has already been mentioned earlier in the article. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 08:26, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Universities Template

Hey - I like the style of Template:Colleges and universities in metropolitan Boston and think it would be cool if the Pittsburgh Universitied Template took on more of a look like that. Then it would be cool in the Carnegie Mellon article. --Matt 06:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

City, County, State is a long-standing convention for US cities (when more than one "cityname" in a state)

I think you are risking creating duplicate articles, as well as causing people much confusion by creating article titles like Pittsburg, Illinois (Fayette County) instead of Pittsburg, Fayette County, Illinois. See Mountain View and Mountain View, Contra Costa County, California for just one of many examples. They should all be moved, or merge/redir'd if found to already exist at the standard title. (See also Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities#Structure_.28format_for_city_template.29) 165.121.30.24 04:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Portal

I would be interested. I am not the best at fomratting (which is why I han't started yet...:-/). I can help with content and I have a friend who can work with style and content (and a native), so I would take any help offered as well.

Also, one idea I had was a map where things (buildings, streets, bridges) were clickable and took the viewer tot hat article. Still working on finding a map, though.

--Jimktrains 20:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Police POV

I could understand the POV for "safest cities" wouldn't agree but would understand. What I am very confused about is what other organization/group would be held most responsible for any criminal statistics or lack there of by the citizens of a city? I don't mind rephrasing but I think it is pointless to somehow leave the police agency of a municipality OUT of the justification for why or why not it might be one of the safest cities in the country. Hholt01 21:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think it would be more verifiable to say a city is "the safest city" if you back it up with a source (e.g., "in 2005, US News and WOrld Report ranked Pittsburgh as the safest city among similarly sized cities.") I'm not disputing that Pittsburgh is a relatively safe city (I used to ride my bike through the Hill District), but there may (and probably are) any number of reasons why. While it is possible that characteristics of the police department are the main factor in the crime level, it would be almost impossible to prove (and thus verify) that statement. If you want to put something in about the quality of the Pittsburgh Police, please try to back it up with a source; maybe a survey, newspaper article, etc., in which they are praised, given an award, etc.

Personally, I think the police in the Pittsburgh area generally do a fine job. I used to work for a software company that worked closely with police in the North Hills; I met a lot of great police officers. I'm just trying to stick to enforce Wikipedia policies. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 22:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Mellon Arena.png

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Mellon Arena.png. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Note that any unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 15:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Final state highway naming conventions debate

Hholt01, your participation is welcome in the Wikipedia:State route naming conventions poll. Please give your input as to the process by 23:59 UTC on August 8.

Regards, Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

re: disambig pages

According to Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Page naming conventions, it is basically a case-by-case, term-by-term basis on whether a word should be redirect or a disambig. It is all based on if there is a well known primary meaning for a term or phrase (indicated by a majority of links in existing articles and consensus of the editors of those articles that it will be significantly more commonly searched for and read than other meanings).

Looking at the page histories, it seems that Steelers use to be a redirect until it was changed to a disambig page on May 19, 2006. [1] And looking at the history of the Browns page, it looks like it use to be a disambig, but was moved and changed into a redirect to the Cleveland Browns article.[2]

If you would like, I can move Browns (disambiguation) back to Browns on the basis that there is no evidence or consensus that the primary meaning of "Browns" should be "Cleveland Browns", especially because I do not know how popular Browns of Chester is in England, or how well known The Browns signing group is. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

You might also want to post something at Wikipedia:Requested moves if you actually want to propose a move, and to get more users to participate. Be sure to also read the "What requested moves are not for" section and the "Steps for requesting a page move" section. Good luck. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

SoaP

Do you have citation for that piece of trivia you just added? If you tell me where you got it, I'll add the citation for it. Just want to be sure it's true, I never heard about that. Thanks. --Nehrams2020 07:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikimeet?

I'm thinking of organizing a Wikipedia meetup in Pittsburgh, and since you indicated on your user page that you live in Pittsburgh, you may want to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Meetup/Pittsburgh and/or its talk page. (Note: If for any reason you do not wish to participate, simply ignore this message.) Scobell302 01:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Pitt Panther Article POV

I tagged the article Pittsburgh Panthers for the lack of a neutral point of view. As the initial author of the article(and its main contributor throughout its history) I have let you know so that you can address the problems. See Talk:University_of_Pittsburgh_Panthers#Tagging_this_article_as_POV. I won't make any changes to the article as I am waiting for feedback first, and welcome any question or comments you may have. Nothing personal- I actually respect Pitt- and am actually a huge Dan Marino fan. Jcam 16:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Petersen.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Petersen.png. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ccwaters 23:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

U.S. Roads Newsletter Issue #1

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter

Volume 1, Issue 1

10 February 2007

About the Newsletter

Departments:	Features:
Project News	Notability of state highways is challenged
Important deletion debates
Featured subproject
Featured member
From the editor

Archives | Newsroom

Shortcut : WP:USRD/N

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 20:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Gnc.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Gnc.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

shared IP self message

I've removed the autoblock. --pgk 19:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

U.S. Roads Newsletter Issue #2

File:New Jersey blank.svg

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter

Volume 1, Issue 2

24 February 2007

About the Newsletter

Departments:	Features:
Project News	Notability of state highways is upheld
Deletion debates	Kansas Turnpike is now a Good Article
Featured subproject	U.S. Roads IRC channel created
Featured member	Infoboxes and Navigation subproject started
From the editors

Archives | Newsroom

Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Apologies for the late delivery. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 05:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 3

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter

Volume 1, Issue 3

10 March 2007

About the Newsletter

Departments:	Features:
Project news	Inactivity?
Deletion debates	Article Improvement Drive
Featured subproject	Good and Featured Articles
Featured member
From the editors

Archives | Newsroom

Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Active user verification

Hello, Marketdiamond. Due to the high number of inactive users at WP:USRD, we are asking that you verify that you are still an active contributor of the project. To do so, please add an asterisk (*) after your name on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter/List. Users without one by the next issue in 2 weeks will be removed off the list and off the respective road projects as well. If you have any questions, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject templates

Please add WikiProject tags, such as {{pghproj}}, to article talk pages, not articles. Thanks, Chris Griswold (☎☓) 15:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Was wondering about that thanks for the clarity, I only did the two realizing that this may not be the right way to do it as a trial balloon. Hholt01 19:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

U.S. Roads Inactivity notification

You have been declared an inactive user and your name will be removed from the newsletter distribution and the projects you were a member of. If this is in error, please contact me on my talk page. Do not restore your name to the list. Regards, Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 21:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:MaxheadroomMpegMan.jpg

Hello, Hholt01. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:MaxheadroomMpegMan.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Hholt01. This image or media will be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 21:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

PIT history

Like I've said before.. other airports have a history section like ours. Look at ATL. It has seven paragraphs. Alot of people want information on the history but can't find it. That's the main reason I put it on here in the first place and have gotten praise for it by people on here and by people at the airport, including people from the Alleghany County Airport Authority. I'm not saying that I want to monopolize this site, but I have spent alot of hours working on this and taking time at work when I SHOULD be working to get this info. It deserves to be left on the main page. If people don't want to read it, then they can scroll down and get the other info they want. Feel free to contact me on AIM, screenname howyfeldersnatch if you'd like to talk about this further. I'm sure we can come to some sort of a conclusion.

Non-free use disputed for Image:84L.PNG

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:84L.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 04:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Pghpolicephoto.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Pghpolicephoto.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Pghpolicepatch.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Pghpolicepatch.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Taken care of Hholt01 17:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

ITN

How to suggest an article for ITN provides instructions on How to suggest an article for the In the news section on the Main Page. -- Jreferee 19:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Relaunching WikiProject Pittsburgh meetups

You are receiving this message because you are a member of the WikiProject Pittsburgh. In the past we have discussed a meetup idea - let's see if we can make it a reality during the summer. Please see this thread for more information.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 23:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Pennsylvania

Hello there!

I'm writing to inform you that we are now forming the first local Wikimedia Chapter in the United States: Wikimedia Pennsylvania. Our goals are to perform outreach and fundraising activities on behalf of the various Wikimedia projects. If you're interested in being a part of the chapter, or just want to know more, you can:

Contact us on IRC at #wikimedia-pa
Join our mailing list
Visit our blog at http://wmfpa.blogspot.com

Thanks and I hope you join up! Cbrown1023 talk 03:21, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Pennsylvania Institute of the Culinary Arts

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Pennsylvania Institute of the Culinary Arts, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. 172.129.137.16 13:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Treveskyn.com

A tag has been placed on Treveskyn.com, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kolindigo 23:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:KDKAcoverage.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:KDKAcoverage.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pittsburgh Galleria

I have nominated Pittsburgh Galleria, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pittsburgh Galleria. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 01:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Steelers.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Steelers.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 04:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Pitt Wikiproject

As a current or past contributor to a Pitt-related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the University of Pittsburgh and the Pitt Panthers. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! CrazyPaco (talk) 04:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Sidney Crosby

Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia by updating the statistics in the Sidney Crosby article. Unfortunately your recent edit(s) has been reverted. This is because the guidelines from the WikiProject on Ice Hockey state that season statistics may only be updated when the season has ended. This is for maintaining a high standard and accuracy on all hockey players articles on Wikipedia. We understand that your edit was in good faith and hope that you understand our objectives. If you have any questions, please visit us at the WikiProject on Ice Hockey's talk page. —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 11:13, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Possibility of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art at the Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh

You may be interested in this. Hope to see you there! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Ron Paul birthplace

Good catch here. You didn't need the web bio, though—ref 2 was misinterpreted and clearly states Pittsburgh as his birthplace! ("b. Pittsburgh, Pa., 20 Aug. 1935, US Representative from Texas...") --an odd name 12:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Reference

In the Pittsburgh mayoral election article you use "PGHGenelection" as a reference name, but here is no reference in the articles with that name. What is it supposed to be? Rich Farmbrough, 11:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC).

Pittsburg, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania

Since you created Pittsburg, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania (back in 2006), I wanted to notify you that I've started a discussion at Talk:Pittsburg, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania#Disputed regarding the existence of this town. Thanks. —Mrwojo (talk) 05:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pittsburg, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pittsburg, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pittsburg, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Portal:Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Are you still planning on putting this portal together? It looks rather empty... if you've given up on it, you may want to tag it for deletion. Zetawoof_(ζ) 09:27, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Steelers.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Steelers.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:OfficerofyearPGH.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:OfficerofyearPGH.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:12, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:OfficerofmonthPGH.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:OfficerofmonthPGH.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

Fair use rationale for File:BureaucitationPGH.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:BureaucitationPGH.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

Fair use rationale for File:MeritoriousservicePGH.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:MeritoriousservicePGH.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

Fair use rationale for File:PurpleheartPGH.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:PurpleheartPGH.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

Fair use rationale for File:CommendationPGH.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:CommendationPGH.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

Fair use rationale for File:ValorribbonPGH.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:ValorribbonPGH.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

Fair use rationale for File:MedalofvalorPGH.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:MedalofvalorPGH.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Hholt01! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 400 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

John Herron (New Brunswick politician) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Steely McBeam

Hey I readded the section about Steely McBeam in the Pittsburgh Steelers article that you removed. Although I personally don't care for him (as does a good chunk of Steeler Nation), he is the mascot, with no signs of the team getting rid of him. Is there a reason behind removing it? Jgera5 (talk) 11:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Did I do that? You sure it was me? If so total accident, yes I am not a fan of Steely but I never let that cloud my editing. I have been adding lots of info to some of the team pages lately and pulling some things from history so if it happened not my intent. I appreciate you catching it for me thanks again. Hholt01 (talk) 06:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Duquesne NIT

Hholt, unfortunately, nobody, not even Duquesne itself, recognizes its 1955 Dukes NIT title as a National Championship. You have your history wrong, and you aren't alone, because many seem to have bought into this retroactive NIT superiority myth. The reality is, by the mid-50s it is hard to argue that the NIT was still the equivalent of the NCAA tournament. In fact, it is hard to argue it was superior prior to that. Besides the unifying title of CCNY in 1950, the only comparative measures were when the Red Cross sponsored a game between the NCAA and NIT champion from 1943-1945 to raise money for WWII. In all three years, the NCAA champion won. Sure, the NIT got some top teams wanting to tap into the NYC media and recruiting, and it was certainly superior to what it ended up being today, but the notion that is often bandied about it being the "premier" tournament doesn't really hold up to historical scrutiny. When you don't have games between champions for comparison, you are then left with opinions of contemporary neutral observers. There are two sources we can turn to here. First, between 1939 and 1982, a period when both tournaments were held and the Helms Athletic Foundation was still handing out its National Championship trophies, in only one season (1939) did Helms chose the NIT Champion over the NCAA Champion. Second, if we look at the final AP basketball polls (available from 1949 on at appollarchive.com), both tournaments have top teams in their fields, but the NCAA tournament has the lion's share. In fact, in 1955, Bill Russell and San Francisco Dons were ranked #1 from February 8th through the AP's final poll, and would repeat as national champions the following season. Only a total of three teams ranked in that season's final AP poll participated in the 1955 NIT: #6 Duquesne, #9 Dayton, and #20 St. Louis.

Here are the facts about 1955 tournament selection process in particular. In 1955, the NCAA awarded automatic bids to conference winners and was considered the preferred tournament because its field contained all of the conference champions, along with at-large bids for 9 of the top independents. The independents where the only group of schools that the NIT was ever competitive in wooing. When there were ties for the conferences, there were coin flips of conference votes on where to send the teams. Conferences didn't get multiple bids like the do now. For instance, in 1955 the Missouri Valley voted to send #16 Tulsa go to NCAA and #20 St. Louis to the NIT. For conferences, the NIT has always been the consolation prize. For independents, the NCAA was also typically the desired tourney to go to, although the NIT was able to grab some of the better independents because they would give them a bye, unlike the NCAA which wouldn't, and because it was easier to travel to for east coast based teams that might also want exposure in NYC for recruiting purposes. AP and Coaches poll #1 San Francisco, then an independent, actually turned down an NIT invitation in anticipation of an at-large bid from the NCAA. That NCAA tournament featured 7 of the top ten AP teams. At the time that the bids were offered in early February, Duquesne, then number 4, was the only team ranked in the top ten to accept an NIT bid (Dayton was #15). I think it goes without saying, that if they wanted to prove themselves against the top teams in the nation, they chose extremely poorly as only three ranked teams ended up in that NIT field, one of which was conference runner-up St. Louis, and Duquesne was well aware at the time that the teams ranked ahead of them were going to the NCAA. This is a major reason that they are not considered national champions by anyone. The NIT Tournament, despite the desire of former NIT teams to romanticize it, was never considered the superior tournament in the 50s, and that pretty much goes for the 40s as well.

I'm not picking on the Dukes. I like the Dukes and sure, Duquesne was good, and the "toast of broadway", but there is a reason they are not considered the "toast of the nation". There is no contemporaneous or retroactive third party source that has ever named Duquesne 1955 national champions. So, unless you want to change what the generally understood meaning of a "national champion", you can't put them there with any historical accuracy. CrazyPaco (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the Bob Smizik's blog, he has his history flat out wrong as well. He is often wrong in his columns, and seldom does research to verify claims. Frankly, he is a sloppy opinion columnist, not a historian. I have found no links on GoDuquesne.com claiming that the 1955 NIT championship team were national champions. If you have links that show that, please share them, however I'm pretty sure they do not exist. As far as independents being the norm, that is not true. There were more independents, sure, but there were many conferences. The NCAA tournament consisted of 15 conference champions and 9 at-large slots. So there were plenty of conferences out there (at least 15 I guess), including many of the ones that exist today: ACC, SEC, Big 10, Pacific Coast (Pac-10), Big Seven (Big Eight/12), Southwest (B12), Ivy, Missouri Valley. And then there were conferences like the Southern (WVU), Skyline (Utah/BYU) and Middle Atlantic Conference (LaSalle). So no, it wasn't necessarily the norm to be an independent.

I really don't agree at all with your point at all about the 1955 NIT title being more meaningful than the '64 Browns title. In 1964 Cleveland won the highest championship they could. They had no ability to play the AFL champion. Is that a split title like so many in college football?... possibly. However, in 1955, Duquesne did not win the highest championship they could in college basketball. They had a choice as to where to play, and frankly on the surface, it looks like they ducked the competition. It can absolutely not be considered a split title, and no one (except apparently Bob Smizik), not even Duquesne, tries to sell that. No authority then or now recognizes Duquesne as a national champion. I don't understand your point about the 1955 Dodgers or Warriors. I don't see a connection at all with those and Duquesne. If your point is one about how many legitimate banners a city should have to brag about, that it way out of the scope of wikipedia. That is stuff for blogs.

As far as the 1901 and 02 Pennants, I'm not sure they should not be necessarily touted as "world titles" since the AL was there as well. The pennants are equivalent to those league titles of the Browns. They are the highest possible championship the Pirates could obtain at the time. A split "world title" perhaps. I understand where you are coming from on this, but I'm not sure what your goal is here. I agree they are more meaningful than a pennant today because they were the highest thing the Pirates could win. However, Wikipedia is just an encyclopedia of verifiable facts. It's not really open to editorializing about how meaningful pre-1903 pennants are compared to those after. It seems like you want to get a special categories added to the MLB team infobox to confer special status to pre-World Series pennants, and I don't think you're going to get that.

But, if I understand your point about early NFL titles, I completely disagree with you there. As far as your point about the Chicago Cardinals, I assume you aren't referring to the controversial nature of the 1925 title, but rather that these titles are somehow diminished because they happened so long ago. Ignoring the 1925 controversy, they are the same status: the highest possible championship in the sport of professional football (there wasn't even a competing league then). Just because professional football wasn't as popular doesn't diminish those accomplishments. IMO, they are more significant because they are highest level of undisputed championship in the sport of professional football, whereas the early pennants are at best split, and the NIT title was absolutely not considered to be the national championship event.

Steigerwald is completely out of his element if he is talking about anything outside of hockey. He really has no business commenting about basketball at all, let alone history he is obviously completely oblivious to. In fact, that is true for the entirely of the Pittsburgh sports media. There is not one personality in Pittsburgh that really knows anything about basketball, let alone history of the sport 50 years ago. Smizik should just stick to ranting about the Pirates. Neither is a credible source for historical verification. BTW, if you want to read contemporaneous accounts of the 1955 NCAA & NIT, just jump on Google news archives. CrazyPaco (talk) 20:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

U-PARC

Hey Hholt, do have any references for two changes you made to the University of Pittsburgh Applied Research Center article? Specifically the change from the number of buildings at the time of the ownership transfer from 54 to 55 and the additional Chevron donation from $3 to $5 million? I have a couple of sources that have those figures at the former values: Alberts history, Pittsburgh Press1 Pittsburgh Press2, Pittsburgh Press3, Post-Gazette, Post-Gazette2. thanks, CrazyPaco (talk) 08:02, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Pittsburgh bias

Hi. I can tell that you are a loyal Pittsburger. Please take note of WP:DOY when adding events to the days of the year articles. Many of the events that you're adding do not meet the global notability requirements for inclusion in the date articles. These might certainly be notable in Pittsburgh, but they are not notable globally. If you have questions, please ask. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 11:30, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your insight, I will be willing to back up any questions you may have about the relevance to "global" events. Are there a few specific ones that you find questionable? Please refer to: Portal:Pittsburgh/On_this_day, I am in no way including Pgh events just to include them (only the most global). All about making wikipedia as accurate and relevant as possible and non-pgh centric however I have seen outright bias such as Wikinews replying to me that the G-20 summit wasn't newsworthy because it took place outside of (I am assuming "relevant" cities like) New York, Toronto or Seattle, and an editor calling KDKA a cable access "show" (couldn't even get it as a "channel" let alone a O&O broadcast, a few of us had to remind him that the call letters were the first granted and there are K-stations on the east coast. The truth always lies somewhere in the middle, in no way are all Pgh events global, but I have faith that you realize things do take place outside of the pop-culture centers. Thank you and will be more than willing to consider your thoughts (and eventual if necessary deletions)on any borderline entries. Hholt01 (talk) 11:44, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Pittsburgh

Hello Marketdiamond/Archive 1, this message is being sent on behalf of WikiProject Pittsburgh. You have previously signed up as a member and we are currently trying to determine any members that have become inactive or no longer care to be a member. If you still wish to be on the member list, please sign your name here. Thank you, on behalf of the project, Grsz¹¹ 17:42, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

St. Clair Village

So it is gone now?Pustelnik (talk) 19:33, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

The housing project? To be honest if the wiki article says so I guess so, I know where that place is but couldn't honestly tell you if it is gone, I just added the NavBox, Pittsburgh Housing Authority has a website if you want to check it out to satisfy your curiosity :). Not in favor of deleting the article if that is what you are getting at. Thanks let me know if that answers your question. Hholt01 (talk) 20:56, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

24/7

24/7 is HBO Documentary on BOXING. Not NFL, NHL or Nascar. Stop making ridiculous alterations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.152.195.145 (talk) 01:55, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

This is level one of vandalism warning, welcome to Wikipedia! We cite sources here, please read them and please never vandalize a Wikipedia page again. It is good Wikipedia form to leave a note asking BEFORE making a deletion of sourced referenced material, especially when you are brand new to Wikipedia. Again welcome, would be happy to answer any questions you may have before you undo wikipedians efforts at contributions. Hholt01 (talk) 03:47, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

You can't warnings you moron! Now leave the page alone you fool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.155.240.172 (talk) 10:35, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

If you had concern for Wikipedia outside of constantly vandalizing one page you wouldn't sign in under a proxy host out of the city of London, again Welcome to Wikipedia we cite sources here, and you can join, I would love to explain how but it is obvious you have already joined and are extremely skilled in wiki policies, and yet your proxy host IP has NEVER been on wiki other than to harass and vandalized contributors. Hholt01 (talk) 16:17, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

BIG YAWN. Stop making ridiculous changes to the article you fool. 24/7 is purely boxing. Nothing else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.155.240.172 (talk) 03:16, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Stop personally attacking another editor over your edits, thats not how we resolve disputes. If you continue, you will be blocked for disruption. Momo san ^Talk 03:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Why don't you do your job and stop this numpty from making further incorrect edits to the page??--109.152.251.40 (talk) 11:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Alfond Stadium (University of Maine)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Alfond Stadium (University of Maine), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Alfond Stadium. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

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. CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:10, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Alfond Stadium a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 04:24, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Requesting help for University of Pittsburgh course involving Wikipedia

Hello, I'm teaching a composition course at Pitt that involves researching and writing about Pittsburgh neighborhoods. For one of the students' projects, I'm having them expand existing Pittsburgh Wikipedia stubs. Everyone is new to Wikipedia editing (including myself). We've had some help already from User:Piotrus, but he also suggested I recruit other editors working on Pittsburgh projects to help us. Would you be willing to give us feedback and advice as we move along? Our deadline is 11/22, and I'd love to have feedback for students by 12/6.

My course page is here User:Llh19/pittsburghcityseminar, with links at the bottom to the pages students are editing (6 total).

Let me know if you might be willing to help. Thanks very much for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Llh19 Llh19 (talk) 03:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)Llh19

Glad to help, I'll leave my comment on your course page. Hholt01 (talk) 04:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

.pdf Question

Thanks much! We have a question regarding citing a .pdf that has already been cited on the South Side page but the code is missing because the citation appears in an infobox. The user wants to cite the Census reference again but cannot find the correct coding because of this. Do you mind helping us and commenting on the South Side (Pittsburgh) page? Thanks again! Llh19 (talk) 16:49, 17 November 2010 (UTC)Llh19

Will assist on that pages discussion, thanks for the opportunity!Hholt01 (talk) 19:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Heinz Field

[3] Haha, I don't know, have you seen that place lately? Grsz 11 01:17, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Pittsburgh event for Wikipedia's tenth anniversary

Hi! Since you're a member of WikiProject Pittsburgh, I wanted to invite you to the Wikipedia Tenth Anniversary celebrations we're having in Pittsburgh on Saturday, January 15. During the daytime, we're going to be having a photo contribution drive where anyone can bring in their digital photos or prints and Wikipedians will teach people how to upload them and add them to articles, and maybe introduction to Wikipedia workshops as well. Then in the evening, we'll have fun at the Carson City Saloon. There will be free Wikipedia t-shirts and other goodies, as well. See the Pittsburgh meetup page for more details. I hope to see you there!--ragesoss (talk) 14:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join Wikimedia US/WALRUS mailing list

Hi, my wiki-Pittsburghese friend! I'd like to invite you to join wikimediaus-l, where we already discussing The Great American Wiknic for June 2011 :)--Pharos (talk) 04:09, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Hholt01 (talk) 20:16, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

.--Kumioko (talk) 02:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Pittsburgh navbox

Hholt01, When you get a chance, take a look at the colors I added to the Pittsburgh navbox. Feel free to tweak them however you want. As you suggested on the talk page there, it should be black and gold, and there is no reason for it not to be. CrazyPaco (talk) 03:32, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up CP, yes I have been meaning to get some good faith consensus on that, though not sure how some editors with virtually no knowledge on a subject can just randomly delete something. Let me know if I can assist with any facts if you should need that from anyone wishing to take our "H" again er colors yeah colors. :-) Hholt01 (talk) 03:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Carnegie Library

Dear Hholt01! Is it possible to provide me with an article from the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh? So I want to ask you for this article:

Sprackland, R. G. 1999. New species of monitor (Squamata: Varanidae) from Indonesia. in: Reptile Hobbyist, 4(6): 20-27.

For any help I will very thank you. It will help for the refinement of Wikipedia articles. Please reply here on this site. Thank you very much indeed, Doc Taxon (talk) 06:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for honoring me with the request. Unfortunately my knowledge and expertise on all things Pittsburgh region (including the Carnegie, Hillman at Pitt, Hunt at Carnegie-Mellon, and Gumberg at Duquesne libraries) is grows proportionally to my status of being an unfortunate diasporan. I will be in Central Florida for at least the next three months. I do encourage you to call the Carnegie Library or it might be advisable to call the Carnegie Museum of Natural History (they are super smart on species and animal research), also some of what you are looking for may be available in part on their website. Both institutions have assisted me both in person and remotely by emailing me certain documents for a small fee. If for some reason this isn't possible for you please feel free to ask as a general question on the WikiProject Pittsburgh. I wish I could assist further, honestly I would rather be in a cubicle at the Carnegie Library or Natural History museum right now! Best of luck to you. Hholt01 (talk) 03:27, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

June 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 18:59, 12 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)

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)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pittsburgh activity

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pittsburgh is rolling out some new features (see our discussions at WT:PITTSBURGH). We are also trying to determine how many members are active, and interested in contributing to Pittsburgh content or coming to our real life meetups to discuss Wikipedia in general. If you could go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pittsburgh/Members and move your name from inactive to the active or semi-active group (depending on your interest in Pittsburgh issue and overall activity) groups, this would be great. Hopefully in a near future you'll also receive our first newsletter with various information on what we have been doing, and what useful tools are available. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Morgan's Raid in Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio

This edit that you made to the raw_name of Template:Campaignbox Morgan's Raid in Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio broke the v · d · e portion of the template, so I reverted it. The CWSAC lists the campaign as Morgan's Raid in Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio [July 1863] and it appears that the CWSAC list was the basis for most of the Civil War Campaignboxes. If you want to rename it, I guess you'll need to move the template and then, I suppose, fix these transclusions/links per WP:BRINT — but, I'm not 100% certain since I don't have a whole lot of template experience. Mojoworker (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 01:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Years in radio

Just pointing out the the Years in Radio you are editing are for internationally notable events. Just because something may have been notable in the US does not necessarily mean it is notable enough for inclusion in a Year in Radio article. Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 09:36, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Although the majority of your entries are of "firsts", which mostly seem sufficiently notable, you have not provided many citations backing up these claims. I could tag or remove them but as you obviously have a source(s) it would be better if you added them. The first presidential broadcast is particularly problematic as this website suggests 1919 as another possibility. In any case for international notability it should be entered as "first broadcast by a state leader". You might also like to look at your entry under "Debuts" in 1922. Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 10:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Added what you requested (see talkpage) thanks. Hholt01 (talk) 01:32, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Orioles-Pirates rivalry for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Orioles-Pirates rivalry 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/Orioles-Pirates rivalry 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. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:32, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Your contributed article, James Slusser

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, James Slusser. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - James Sussler. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at James Sussler - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Baseball Watcher 21:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

John Colter

Hi Hholt01; I wonder if you'd be kind enough to proofread your edit, please?[4] Best wishes, --Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Reread it, what exactly is the issue? Hholt01 (talk) 16:57, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

"Colter was, along with George Shannon and Patrick Gass along with dog Seamen joined the expedition while Lewis was waiting for the completion of their vessels in Pittsburgh and nearby Elizabeth, Pennsylvania." I wonder if you intended to use the verb "was" and repeat "along"? Thank you, --Walter Siegmund (talk) 23:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Fixed thanks for bringing it to my attention. Hholt01 (talk) 01:30, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Pitt Portal On this Day

Hholt,

Thank you for your work on the "On This Day" portion of the Pitt Portal. You have added many interesting events to the list. However, I would caution, as many of your additions had wrong dates and incorrect information, to take some time to make sure the date actually corresponds to an event of noteworthiness, as publishing dates are not necessarily correct, nor necessarily, are the date an announcement was published correctly correspond to an actual event. I am going to try to source the added events with  brackets from now on so the dates are clear and maintain the integrity of encyclopedic information. I went through those that you added, fixed some up, deleted some that were repetitive or only tangentially related to Pitt, and added wikilinks, the correct category tag, as well as some images where appropriate. Let me know if you have any questions about the changes that I made and I'd be happy to explain them further. It really helped having that you have found some good events to fill in some empty dates, and the OTD is nicely expanded thanks to your work, so thank you again! CrazyPaco (talk) 12:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Happy to hear of your appreciation, and very observant of you to notice I am seeking to "fill the void" as it were with all these dates. I share your concern with some source dates (a couple Pgh sources even contradict each other on what exact day something took place), there are also a few that have double entries (from contradictory sources?) that I have been meaning to check so if you fact checked those I'm eternally grateful. As for the relevance or "tangential relation" (paraphrase), I wonder if there is a wiki standard or quasi policy on that, with my experience researching it for the Pittsburgh Portal, thinking what an evening newscast or the next days paper would lead with in the local section has kind of been the only standard that made sense. I have experimented with a few standards aside from what KDKA or the Gazette would lead with the next day and those have all failed in a least one big way. Love to hear your thoughts on that, I have stopped short of noting major blizzards, tropical storms and tornadoes in the Pitt "on this day" however the more I think about it in the standard of what would WPTS or the Pitt News or even the Chancellor be concerned about in that moment in time the more it would make sense for inclusion. Also small point and I defer to your expertise on the specifics with the item about the stem cell research, but to ignore it completely as a news item in my view defeats the purpose of "on this day" which by the only standard that seems to work everytime is to place the reader right in that day. I admit I may not have got the specifics right and that it could be reworded to say that they were unfounded but a complete deletion? Interested in your thoughts. Oh and I have added the raw citation brackets to the ones on the Pgh portal because some of the things I have run across I can't even believe, have wondered if there could instead be a consolidated reference page with numbers on the "on this day", not up on all the wiki tricks so insight would be appreciated. Hholt01 (talk) 17:29, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

There are not many Wikipolicies for portals, other than universal things like WP:FACT and WP:ALIVE (the later is one reason I removed the stem cell one). It is up to the individual projects. I haven't followed your work on the Pittsburgh portal, but the one in question is a University of Pittsburgh portal, it should be factual, and importantly, directly related to the university and mark something notable or interesting over its 224 year history. As a portal feature, I also feel that it should serve to direct readers to content within the Pitt Wikiproject (thus be wikilinked). I disagree that simple reporting in newspapers or the Pitt News or issuing a press release necessarily denotes something significant in the history of the university. Pitt has many of these publications and press releases digitized on its on-line archives, but only a fraction are appropriate material for something that had impact or lasting resonance (like you said, every basketball game or blizzard is not going to cut it). The other issue is definitive dates. As an "On this Day" feature it demands that an event be tied to an individual day...like a grand opening or a sports event. Events vaguely tied to a day, for instance through a press release, may not really be appropriate for "On this date". There is likely a difference in opinion on exactly the purpose such a feature should serve, but for the Pitt portal I think it should be kept relevant to the university and not watered down by "news of the day" items. This of course, some of these are judgement calls, but typically, I had other reasons for some of my changes/deletions, such as it not having a clear relationship to the university. Keep in mind though, that while my following responses may seem critical to the issues you bring up, I want to reiterate for every one that I had an issue with, you found a true gem (like the Jerome Land backboard smash)! CrazyPaco (talk) 04:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Quick aside CP, some of the ones you deleted such as "didn't construct union" were taken from the chronology [5]. As I'm sure you've noticed an editor like me would know the detailed history of the Schenley, but as I stated above the only workable standard I've found is what newspapers and WPTS and the students would be talking about that specific day and year, I believe the Schenley was still a hotel in 1954 so on that day in that year news of a constructed union would be legit. Small potatoes but by this standard I'm sure the Pitt News and students would be talking about their colleague being the one on the Bridge to Nowhere, not gonna fight that hard for its inclusion but history is some of the funniest comedy there is, it gets a bad rap if we only limit things to what today would be derisively called "press release news", I'm sure scores of alumni have that as their best memory! Hholt01 (talk) 18:02, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Here's the problem with the particular example of the union building announcement: Pitt had actually announced multiple plans for a union over the years. One was part of the Acropolis Plan on the hill, two different ones on the Cathedral Lawn in gothic style, one was to build one on the site behind where Clapp Hall is now (what this release is referring to), one was actually to tear down the Schenley Hotel, another was to actually wrap the hotel in a new building. None of these took place. Pitt purchased the Schenley in 1956 to use as dorms (its first) and as a student center, and instead it evolved into a dedicated union over time. Every announcement of building plans is not a notable event in the history of the university, particularly those with large components that never came to fruition, though I will agree that especially elaborate ones might be (and the 1960s plan was particularly aggressive and resulted in major campus changes). As a counter example of plans that never came to fruition but would be suitable for inclusion because of their attention (national), scope, and lasting impact would be the Acropolis Plan and the Panther Hollow research park plan. Both massive, major plans that fell through, and could be wikilinked to existing articles. However, I fail to see how an announcement of the plan to build a parking garage (O'Hara Street Parking Garage), a physicians office building (did not happened as planned), a student union that did not happen, and a men's dormitory (site was to be behind the current Clapp Hall location and it did not happen), is significant to the university, and it certainly doesn't lead the reader to any information within the Pitt WIki projects. So absolutely, I do not think that just because something appeared in the news in its day that it is necessarily interesting or relevant, otherwise, we could just fill it up the year with each day's Pitt press releases or Pitt News headlines. The source for this information, the historic timeline you used, seems to have some issues as it comes form Stefan Lorant book. He seems to have just added things without explanation and without context or knowledge of what it was, and he either wasn't selective at all about what he included or he wasn't a student of the university's particular history. This isn't your fault, it is the fault of the Stefan Lorant book source of the Historic Timeline. Even if it was significant at the time, without accompanying information to explain it, it is seems pretty meaningless and actually misleading to a reader, and DYK is just not the place wear you can detail and explain such things with the necessary depth and source information like in a full Wikipedia article, particularly when there isn't accompanying information to link to because, in this example, the plans never happened. So imagine the for a reader coming across the "Pitt announced this" in the DYK, what does the reader supposed to take from it? Did that mean Pitt built the William PItt Union? What are the Physicians' offices? What garage? See, there no context and no explanatory information because it can't be wikilinked. DYK should not need paragraphs of explanation to keep the reader from being misled or confused, and if it did have accompanying information it would take significant research. Really, this building plan in question is even beyond the scope of the History of the University of Pittsburgh article. CrazyPaco (talk) 04:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

CP, you know my work here well enough to know I wouldn't be up info I didn't have a source for, also I was under the impression it was well established that unless it was in another wiki article or a citation was provided, ALL data came from your alma mater: [6] and [7] for quick delete respectively, I know the contributor has the obligation to source but I think we are being just a little too quick to delete here given the magnitude of the dates-info-sourcing-wikify tasks that "on this day" takes as well as my long established record of having credible (though possibly wrong, which is another whole issue for all of wikipedia) sources. Also was cited at origin and can be read [8] though rewording might be good for it, retrospectively it is easier to refer to things as many would know them (present name). Wouldn't things work out much better if you added "needs citation" to the ones you had concerns about and allow editors to build from the base of the contribution (or in this editors case point you to your alma mater's site, other wiki article or the Pittsburgh Chronology)? I'm all for rooting out vandals and editors that really don't know what they are writing about but some editors on here tend to play in just one pond and at the very least have several sources to create an interesting discussion on credibility of certain contribs, I think given the sheer expanse of research some of this takes a notation might be the best solution on these and restoration of all of these. Final thought I would agree with you here but its not the type of news but the subject of it, this was certainly headline items throughout the country and world, at the time a world's first, by the standard of living through that day again would make this a relevant contribution imho. Also a reword of this may have been the right move, thanks for catching the subtle difference by the way, [9] and weren't students of Pitt they technically Pitt students even if for a semester? Hholt01 (talk) 18:46, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I am certainly am not implying that you didn't have a source, as I alluded to above, the issue is the source is not always good, particularly in understanding the context as it relates to the history of the university (and yes, I'm saying I have more expertise than that source on many of these topics than the author of that book). (btw, some of your links in the above paragraph don't work). For the AIDS center, for example, every year the university receives multi-million dollar Center grants. There are dozens, probably 100 that exist just at Pitt. You could fill up an entire year just the awarding of major grants. In 2010 alone, Pitt had 51 major training center awards, and over 1000 awards overall. A major problem is it source doesn't even name the center or what Pitt's role was. It seems to be a clinical trial, but it isn't specified. It is way too vague and the AIDS award is likely not any more notable than the literally 100s of other Center awards that Pitt has received over the decades. The date is also highly suspect: the only way to actually know when the award was made is to look on the NIH award notice, which we do not have access to since it is 1984 (thus there isn't a definitive day it is associated with). I know most people wouldn't know how those things work, so I don't fault anyone for that, and the likely the date used was the date of press release by the university, which are issued for all of these types of center grant, but I think it sets a low standard for inclusion as a notable event because it singles out one center unfairly from 100s of others. Further there is not, and has not been, a AIDS Center at Pitt that is noteworthy enough to have its own article or linkable to and Pitt was not significantly involved in their development of HIV drugs (largely happened at Merck). Inclusion of this looks sort of silly because the context isn't known (how many centers were awarded after all?) This is a convergence of many of my areas of expertise, as I have been directly involved in HIV research, including work with anti-retroviral drugs, so this really does not inspire confidence in me for the source of this material which is the Lorant book. Let me contrast this to a center I think would be notable: the NSF/NASA Space Research Coordination Center awarded to Pitt that I think you entered. The difference is, although like the AIDS center there really there wasn't much significant "space" research that has came out of it, is that 1) there was big press of its announcement (press conference with a definitive date, although I may have check for accuracy), it received HUGE coverage at the time, as people were speculating that the award was signaling that the region would become a new center for space-related industry (this obviously didn't happen), but most importantly, 3) its legacy still has a tangible physical presence at Pitt with the Space Research and Coordination Center. So to reiterate, that Lorant book does not impress me as a source that differentiates well between the noteworthiness or impact of different events for the university, and the university is also key here. I can touch on others too, but it may not be appropriate for your user page (better to discuss on the actual DYK page). Briefly though, with the vaccine order, that simply has nothing to do with Pitt other than Pitt developed the vaccine while at Pitt. It doesn't belong. Either does Road Rules mentions. I actually watched several of those shows when they aired hoping to hear a mention of Pitt and it never happened in the episodes that I saw. When it was involved with Semester at Sea, all Pitt did was sponsor the credits, so the independent Institute for Ship Board Education essentially used Pitt's accreditation. It was the Institute's program, which was independently operated. Pitt has long since severed that relationship (now connected to UVA), and no, the students were not really considered Pitt students and they aren't considered Pitt alumni. Besides there not being any explanation about why it even would be associated with the dates it was listed under, it really had nothing to do with Pitt, and the accompanying Wikipedia article explains no relationship about it. Shows or films filming on Pitt's campus would be potentially relevant, but the Road Rules filming on Semester at Sea wasn't even that notable for Pitt at the time that it actually aired. I thought I left the GSPH entry, that was a mistake and I'll reverse it given the source. The Magee entry: I just couldn't figure out what it was actually saying happened on that date. I'm still not sure. CrazyPaco (talk) 04:02, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 15:53, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 02:27, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of television shows shot in Pittsburgh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Blind Spot, Silencers, Sudden Death, Blind Date and Off Limits

List of films shot in Pittsburgh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to End Game, Chris Evans and No Place Like Home

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC)