User talk:Dravecky/Archive 7b

If you spot any standardization in links, and ways we can automate parts of this process, or for groups of countries that have links in common, please let me know!

Administrative support for outlines

There has been growing pressure on me to write up the administrative pages for outlines - their instructions, guidelines, etc. Therefore, I'm now in the process of composing these. Fortunately, it is mostly a matter of gathering material from messages I've written to you guys over the past year. Still, this is taking up most of my time, and I will be buried in these for the foreseeable future.

Traffic control

The next big task after the government branches sections are cleaned up is link support for the outlines.

There's quite a list of links and notices that need to be put in place around Wikipedia, providing access to them to readers, and alerting editors to the need to develop and maintain these pages. This will keep our bot people very busy (and happy).

But the most important thing right now is to get the government branches sections completed. So please, put your bots aside, roll up your shirt sleeves, and start typing.

Thank you.

The Transhumanist 03:18, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Dravecky

Two requests:

1. Rhena Schweitzer is misspelled on the Template:Did you know/Queue/1. Can you please fix?
2. Could you please add me as creator of that article?

Tx & rgds - Bongomatic 04:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Cc: PeterSymonds, Gatoclass

The typo was fixed before I got there but the credit templates have now been adjusted. - Dravecky (talk) 04:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Obliged. Bongomatic 04:53, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Troyster87, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J Stalin (3rd nomination). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Troyster87 (talk) 08:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow, don't ask me how, but I completely missed your note on Colleen Howe's article and it's potential. Fortunately, it looks like other editors independently brought it up to snuff. I am not certain if they had a DYK nomination in mind, however I will check it over tomorrow and nominate in their names if they have not done so already. Resolute 03:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I see that it already was, whew! Resolute 03:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks anyway, I appreciate your time and attention to this. - Dravecky (talk) 03:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm nearing the end of my epic pass through all the licensed radio stations, the resulting page moves, new dab page creations, and development of the missing article list — only about 17 FM frequencies left to go. And as I'm approaching the end, the one thought that keeps bubbling to the top is "well, it's nice that I've done all this based on the state of the FCC database at December 19, 2008, but what about everything that's happened since then?" A little sick, I know, but it occurs to me that there's still a gap to fill in, and that I might want to try and keep it clean on an ongoing basis too.
So, I've tracked down what I believe is the right tool for that job — the FCC's daily release of broadcast actions. The problem is that it's written in a language that I don't entirely understand yet. I'm not especially interested in the minutiae — HAAT, ERP, and the like — so I think I'm fine steering clear of things like "applications for minor modification to a construction permit granted". But I'd like to be able to understand this sucker enough so that it's obvious when a brand-new station gets up and running, or an existing station changes frequency, city of license, or call sign.
In the unlikely event that you have the time, might you have any thoughts about a 60-second primer that'll point me in the right direction when I read this sucker? Mlaffs (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, that's a good question. Taking a look at today's Broadcast Actions report, I see you'd definitely want to take note of any applications for license to cover, for assignment of license, for assignment of permit, and for license to cover plus at least check out the applications for modification of license, for modification of a construction permit, and minor change to a licensed facility as those can contain changes to frequency and city of license. (Yes, even in the minor modifications, under the current rules.) - Dravecky (talk) 00:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much! SMSpivey (talk) 03:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. Keep up the great work. - Dravecky (talk) 04:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

With Mlaffs working on the radio frequency pages, would it be out of line to start linking the frequencies on the respective radio station pages to those frequencies or would that be over Wikilinking? - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 13, 2009 @ 04:35

You mean like 97.3? I don't think it would be out of line but it's also something I really don't see a need for at this time. Go for it, if you so desire. - Dravecky (talk) 04:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

If you'll both pardon my lurking, I'd actually vote no, for what it's worth. The frequency pages are set up as disambiguation pages, which shouldn't ordinarily have incoming links. You'd end up popping RussBot's weekly dab page clean-up stats through the roof. I've actually been cleaning up any incoming links that I've come across as I've done each page, so that the link goes to the correct station instead. Mlaffs (talk) 05:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Now, if instead of being disambiguation pages, those pages were set up as List of radio stations broadcasting on 97.3 FM for example, then I think the links might be a not bad idea. That's something to consider. Mlaffs (talk) 05:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I think the last one is a good idea :) That would have to be something that went before

WP:WPRS before we went nuts and moved them all probably....but once you are done updating the pages so they get to the right places. I think it would be nice to have a link to those pages....AMs too. - NeutralHomer • Talk

• March 13, 2009 @ 05:33

DYK for WPRN-FM

On WPRN-FM, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page .

Royalbroil 05:38, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I notice that you protected an image that I uploaded to the main page for DYK. The main page has cascading protection, so any image used on DYK automatically is protected. You can verify this by trying to edit the image. You'll notice that the editing window turns pink, which means that the article is fully protected. See

Ah, I was just following the edicts laid out in the instructions to always protect the uploaded image. If that step's not required any more, I'll happily save the step. - Dravecky (talk) 06:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

No worries. It certainly doesn't cause harm to do it, but it's not needed. I once tried to have the rules changed, but some people were stubborn in their beliefs and wouldn't do a supervised test themself. There's a bot (MPUploadbot) that uploads Commons images on the main page to the English Wikipedia, but it doesn't do it immediately. So I don't have faith that some vandal won't quickly upload a shocking image here during the lag. Cheers! Royalbroil 12:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Update needed from

I'm on it. - Dravecky (talk) 15:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Dravecky, Saint Patrick's Day is on 17 March which is quite soon. I noticed you do some updating and the DYKs probably should be queued. Could you do it or ask someone else to? There appear to be ten so, presuming there are three queues, that would be three per queue with one left over? Three of them are mainly television, one episode and two documentary shows, so that's easily divided. Three are also music including the massive one I am in some way responsible for. Two involve siblings, whilst there are two individuals. Four directly mention Saint Patrick's Day so perhaps three could be divided that way to ensure one mention of the day is always up? Two have potential images. Just some suggestions which I hope may be helpful... :) if some aren't 1500 characters I can attempt to update them especially if they're my own... --Candlewicke _S^T _# :) 20:11, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Candlewicke _S^T _# :) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

There's a really suspicious nom on the

This is getting fishier by the second. The blocked user didn't actually create that article, another user did. Another user with few edits, only on March 13. Shubinator (talk) 05:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Yup, see my note under this nom. The article itself checks out as sound (it's part of the pattern where each new sock does good work before going crazy). - Dravecky (talk) 05:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and as you see below, I've opened a sockpuppet investigation against them both. - Dravecky (talk) 05:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for looking into it. Some socks are quite dumb... Shubinator (talk) 00:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for filing

Just for the record, this took down two more of QRC2006's sockpuppets. - Dravecky (talk) 05:25, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you move WFYN to WBHB-FM, please? The station changed its call sign today it appears. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 18, 2009 @ 05:16

Thanks :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 18, 2009 @ 05:22

No worries. - Dravecky (talk) 05:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

In the next queue: "the the". --Una Smith (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Did you mean in the James Pearson Newcomb hook in queue #2? Got it, thanks. - Dravecky (talk) 16:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Yup. --Una Smith (talk) 16:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Dravecky—nice work with filling up the DYK queues! Just this morning I saw that only

Thanks! The more folks we have verifying, the easier it is to build quality queues. - Dravecky (talk) 18:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to drop you a line to let you know that the list of missing articles is now done. It covers everything that existed on December 19, 2008, and I've also tried to adjust for any of the call sign changes up to February 6, 2009 from that report you flipped me. I'll continue to go through the daily broadcast actions reports, but I think it's pretty complete. Mlaffs (talk) 01:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Excellent. I'm slowly working my way backwards through the list to update the articles, resolve any conflicts, and unwind all of the related changes that must be made to lists and templates. I wish I knew how often the FCC issued this particular report as I'm finding it invaluable. (I did sign up for the Daily Digest e-mail so keeping up with the changes should be easier in the future. Of course, the more of us watching the skies, the better.) - Dravecky (talk) 05:01, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Dravs, I thought I put up a DYK nom for Mar. 7, but I'm not sure what happened to it. Just curious. No worries if it's a nuisance to investigate. It does include bacon though... ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Daniel Case failed it about 13 hours ago (see here) for major problems with the hook, the article, and no response to these issues from the creator of the article. I hate to see any bacon-related article fail but the issues were serious and unresolved. - Dravecky (talk) 04:58, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh well. Thanks for looking into it for me. Much appreciated. I'm sorry I didn't follow up sooner. Be good. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:40, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I pulled this article out of redirect-dom and added some references and some more information, but it feels like something is missing. Since you are good at digging up stuff on articles, would you mind having a look. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 19, 2009 @ 05:16

Thanks! The one I already had (about the Lee Family) but the one about Leesburg having the motto I didn't. Thanks for hte links :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 19, 2009 @ 06:47

Always happy to help out. Enjoy! - Dravecky (talk) 06:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi there! You recently updated the Lorne Munroe talk page to say that there was a DYK on 19 March about him, but I couldn't see it on the main page, nor in the queue. Am i missing something? --GedUK  08:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you need to refresh your view of the main page. Click "Refresh this page" at the bottom of the "On This Day" column on the main page. That hook is currently second on the list, as you can see here for the next five hours or so. - Dravecky (talk) 08:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, the cache clear did it! Thanks :) I think that's the first article i've worked on that's had one! Mainly i work on older articles, but they don't feature, obviously. And just think, this article was up for AfD! --GedUK  08:55, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

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. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I have reintegrated the logo into the history section of

WYOK after it had been removed following this week's format change. - Dravecky (talk

) 06:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I appreciate the fact that my work is finally getting some recognition. TomCat4680 (talk) 10:19, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

You're quite welcome. And thank you for all your hard work on article creation. - Dravecky (talk) 10:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Since I'm gonna assume good faith over this, I'm assuming you need to reread

A massive, unexplained and undiscussed deletion of dozens of nominated hooks, some of them approved and merely waiting insertion into a queue, against the practice and guidelines of DYK? I had no doubt that it needed to be reverted immediately. - Dravecky (talk) 09:14, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The deletion was explained in the edit-summary, which you may not have noticed when clicking rollback. The hooks were older than 8 days. Were you wanting me to link to some essay I wrote somewhere else extrapolating on this? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

An explanation of why you deleted approved hooks and others awaiting final decisions en masse against DYK practice and guidelines would have been useful, yes. The issue of hooks "aging out" has been much discussed on the DYK talk page and consensus is strongly against age being the sole factor for deleting hooks. - Dravecky (talk) 09:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's just a math thing. Hooks number being greater than update space, with the former increasing in number faster than the updates. If you wanna remove them more thoughtfully, that's fine. But a bunch of them should be removed, and shouldn't have been a while ago. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:33, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I looked at Dravecky's edit and see no problem with his use of rollback. Seems like a good use to me. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 21, 2009 @ 09:25

Well that's wrong, and I suggest you actually read our policy on rollback use, NeutralHomer, in addition to "look"ing at your friend's transgression of it. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:33, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I was assuming in good faith that you had simply made this improper deletion with the best of intentions and was content to instantly revert the damage and move on with the business at hand: building DYK queues and weeding through the backlog properly. I had no doubt that this edit needed to be reverted as swiftly as possible. - Dravecky (talk) 09:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

....and I see no problems with the edit (and I have read the rollback policy before I got rollback rights). - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 21, 2009 @ 09:42

@ Drave, I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. That your revert was ok, or the rollback? @ @ NH, your opinion on this doesn't really matter, unless you use it to change policy. In the meantime, if you use rollback in this way it will get removed.Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:46, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Please do not threaten to remove a users rollback rights because of a minor dispute. That is considered quite rude. Now, at present Dravecky is knocking out some of the "hooks" on DYK, so this shouldn't be a problem in a couple minutes. Dravecky knows ALOT about DYK (more than I will ever know) so if he thinks an edit should be reverted and he has consensus and reason to back that revert up, I think that is all the reason you need. Let it go, Dude....don't make a mountain out of...well, there isn't even a molehill there. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 21, 2009 @ 09:50

Rollback gets removed when editors transgress the guidelines for its use, NH. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:54, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) My point? The section you cited states: "If there is any doubt about whether an edit should be rolled back, please do not use this feature." I saw a mass of approved hooks and others awaiting final decisions deleted in a single stroke against DYK practice, consensus, and guidelines and reverted what amounted to deletion vandalism. So I used rollback to revert the edit which I'm sure was well-intentioned but one which I did not have any doubt about whether it should be rolled back. Frankly, I'm trying to hack away at the same pile of aging hooks but I'm trying to do it the right way and this barrage of orange flags ain't helping. If you two want to talk to each other, please feel free to your your own talk pages. - Dravecky (talk) 09:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

(un-indent)(EC) That is right, but nothing has been "transgressed" here. Dravecky, an admin, made a descision backed by consensus and a reason, reverted and is now clearing out those "hooks" in question. I really don't see what there is to discuss. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 21, 2009 @ 09:58

Sorry Dravecky, just trying to "have your back" on this one. Sorry to fill up your talk page. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 21, 2009 @ 09:59

No worries, and I appreciate the support, but it's 5am and the barrage of orange flags is wearing me out. You two can keep chatting but pick another talkpage, okay? Thanks. - Dravecky (talk) 10:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

@ Drave, that's not a reasonable interpretation of the rollback guideline and I can absolutely guarantee you a bunch of such rollback uses would get counted as abuse at AN/I or ArbCom and your explanation as tendentious. I suspect you already know this. At any rate, your use of it caused me to message you and you've wasted a bunch of time apparently trying to defend the indefensible. So if wikipedia policy isn't enough of a consideration, time should be. Other than that, there's no argument here. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 10:04, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

You're right, I should have slapped one of those level-1 "deletion vandalism" on your talk pages. In the future, I'll be more careful to warn you against improper mass deletions against consensus and guidelines so you'll feel better about the precise method I use to undo the damage you caused to a high-profile page. Thanks! - Dravecky (talk) 10:08, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

No, Dravecky, you revert using the undo function or manually, using an edit summary explaining your action. This avoids insulting the person you're reverting, gives them some clue as to why you performed the revert and at the same time avoids setting bad examples to impressionable non-admins (like NH here). Really, you should know better, and I don't see any reason you shouldn't act like this, nor why you expected the issue to get resolved by rolling back an experienced editor with no explanation. For what it's worth, I spent months last year updating the DYK until I got bored of doing it.Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 10:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

You know, Deacon, you've been around here for more than five years. I imagine that you have better things to do with your time than beg for an apology. Even if you firmly disagree with Dravecky here, you've made your point sufficiently for him to understand your view. Given both of your experience in the project, my recommendation is to let it go and get on with it—that's what Dravecky is doing. Bongomatic 11:07, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Apologies for screwing up on the refs for the Charles E. Moore article. Without going into the details, I ended up helping a noob put that article together when I was very busy with other things, and by the time I got to nominating it I was getting a little exasperated by the distraction and very much wanting to get back to my own stuff. So I completely missed the fact that I'd missed a reference. I've added it now and tweaked the hook accordingly, you are welcome to recheck it in the queue now if you like but I can assure you the ref says what I said it does :)

Re the update, sure, I can do the next one, lately I seem to be getting there half an hour early and then while I'm waiting I get distracted by some other job and by the time I come back someone else has posted it :) Gatoclass (talk) 11:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done Gatoclass (talk) 12:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I did drift off, as it turns out, and am now off to get a few more hours of shuteye. - Dravecky (talk) 12:06, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Why do you keep posting an old version when you clear the Next Update? I think the updated directions on the bottom are helpful if some unfamiliar admin were to promote a group to the main page. You can respond here on your talk page if you feel that you need to. Royalbroil 13:45, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I was resetting to a blank version that had been reset to by another admin and I guess I just missed the update. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. - Dravecky (talk) 03:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

From

All done. Thanks for doing the credits! - Dravecky (talk) 00:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Um, you updated

T:DYK :) Shubinator (talk

) 00:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

GAH! Hang on a second. - Dravecky (talk) 00:23, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Shubinator (talk) 00:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

		The 25 DYK Medal
		You've gotten one medal for all the work you do keeping DYK from drowning under the flow of submissions... now here's another one for your work on the opposite side of the coin, writing all those new articles for us to drown under! You also deserve a medal for all the crap that you have to put up with volunteering over there... rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 01:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't do it for the awards, I do it for the money. (Um, we are getting paid for this right? No? Oh. Um, then the awards are nice, too.) - Dravecky (talk) 01:22, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh...I do it for the chicks. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:23, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Are you due for 50 DYK medal? --Boston (talk) 01:56, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

No, just the 25. Thanks. - Dravecky (talk) 02:10, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

You moved this from DYK candidate list to DYK next update but I've never seen it on DYK on the main page and there's no tag on its talk page nor no notice on my talk page. Is it still pending for main page or what? Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:59, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

If you don't mind me butting in, the Orion Howe hook is the picture hook in queue 6. You can see all the queues

here. If the updates go as planned, queue 6 will be on the Main Page on March 23rd, 12:25 UTC (7:25 AM Chicago time). Shubinator (talk

) 15:58, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Shubinator is absolutely correct, if a little optimistic about the precise time that the hook will appear on the main page. It's an excellent hook with a brilliant photo so I'm looking forward to seeing it featured on the main page. Good job. - Dravecky (talk) 16:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks guys. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

After 2-3 weeks or so, someone finally gave me this wonderful medal, and I was very glad that it was you. Hopes to you in your future editing. -- [[

Thanks, and thanks again for all your hard work and great content. - Dravecky (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

My diff changed the username to Y2kcrazyjoker4. Y2kcrazyjoker (talk · contribs), as the current revision reads, hasn't edited since 2006. — TKD::{talk} 11:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

D'oh! My apologies to you and to Y2kcrazyjoker4. - Dravecky (talk) 18:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for removing my hook about Matteo Galvan. No, really, I mean it. In that case, for once the DYK potential wasn't there. People have to settle with the fact that not all articles make good hooks. Punkmorten (talk) 13:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I've found many times that I've finished a nice, long article about a radio station only to realize that there's just nothing hook-y about the station, or at least nothing I can find in online news archives. Sometimes I get lucky (the studio is haunted!) and sometimes I don't (they switched from oldies to talk radio in 1998!) but, until you dig, you never know if you'll find gold. - Dravecky (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

There was no consistent spelling in the 17th century. I've seen quite a few different spellings. I think there are about 16 possibilities 1 or 2 ns, final e or not, i, e, y or ey in the middle. You pay your money and take your pick. I prepared the article off-line. When I came to move it into the main space, I started from a red link in another article that used a different spelling. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 16:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up the formatting on the WRCR (College Radio) refernces. 1200Flasher (talk) 11:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Always happy to help out, especially on radio station articles. - Dravecky (talk) 14:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

LOL, beat me by two seconds again! You are making a habit of this :) Gatoclass (talk) 22:51, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh. You can do the credits, if you want to. - Dravecky (talk) 22:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't want to :) But if you like, we can split them - you can do the user creds and I'll do the page tags. Gatoclass (talk) 23:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I see you've done them already. Gatoclass (talk) 23:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, they hadn't been done... so I've done them. - Dravecky (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually queue 3 should be cleared (Gato just did the update from that queue), so you can move the next update to queue 3? Shubinator (talk) 05:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For cracking me up with that hilarious "Bad Is Bad" reference at the Did You Know? talkpage. Have a great day! :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 06:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Ha! Thank you! - Dravecky (talk) 06:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. :) Have a great day! CarpetCrawler (talk) 06:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Should not-yet broadcasting (or future) radio stations have a page? I ask because I was waiting to make the page for

It's not a black-and-white issue and, I must confess, I too have created a handful of article for radio stations not yet on the air over the last 18 months. As long as there is a compelling reason to create the article and a couple of references can be found (like a "New Jazz station to launch next month" article in the paper or what have you) I think it's acceptable: this is why we have the {{future radio}} template. - Dravecky (talk) 06:27, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

That I understand....if it is in the media (newspapers, etc) then it is OK...but in the case of

KCFF, there was obvious problems with the station....one being the station has "K" callsign and it is in Virginia. So, I held off on posting the article until it was done. It is too late now, it is out there, but I don't know if this is something that should be held off on (unless there are references) or not. - NeutralHomer • Talk

• March 26, 2009 @ 06:30

Just noticed the KCEG AFD. I voted delete on it because the station isn't in the FCC database anymore. Let's hope that doesn't start a trend. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 26, 2009 @ 07:12

Just to be clear, I only nominated because it was never licensed. I just this minute edited an article for a station that got its license and three weeks later went silent for financial reasons. As a licensed station, it's notable and since notability is not temporary, I'll argue to keep it as a viable article even if it should fail to return to the air. - Dravecky (talk) 07:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Licensed stations, totally notable....unlicensed, that's the gray area. That is why I broke from my normal "Keep" vote and voted to delete KCEG since it's license was deleted. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 26, 2009 @ 07:29

That's just it: it never had a license, just a construction permit, otherwise I would not have nominated it in the first place. - Dravecky (talk) 07:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess I confused the construction permit with license :) Sorry about that. :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 26, 2009 @ 07:34

No worries. I just want to make sure that everybody is clear which gate I'm opening before some happy editor gets the bright idea to try to delete all defunct formerly-licensed radio stations and trying to improperly cite this AfD as a precedent. - Dravecky (talk) 07:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

(un-dent) Oh, don't worry, that wouldn't be me. I like all the defunct, fomerly-licensed radio stations right where they are :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 26, 2009 @ 07:40

There you go. Sorry for the crappy skies, the weather went south overnight here. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow. You totally rock. Thanks! - Dravecky (talk) 20:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Information has been added to the WTDR website, which says WSYA will sign on sometime during the second or third week in April. I'm just posting this here, so I will leave it up to your discretion whether or not to even post it on their page. With so many potential launch dates having come and gone, I don't know if it's even worth it. Arob22 (talk) 22:47, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Howdy! Thank you very much for the DYK award. I appreciate it, it is very nice. :) - Darwinek (talk) 19:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

And thank you for creating such great content. Keep up the good work! - Dravecky (talk) 21:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

On KNOE-FM, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page .

rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

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. BJBot (talk) 05:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Graphic restored to article and tag resolved. - Dravecky (talk) 05:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

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. BJBot (talk) 05:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I have replaced this graphic with a superior one so deletion is a-okay. - Dravecky (talk) 05:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

It appears that User:StreamingRadioGuide doesn't like the way I setup an article so he has gone far enough to throw out a couple personal attacks like this and this. Now, I have been called worse, but that doesn't matter...personal attack is a personal attack. I warned him after the first time and he asked for me to report him....but instead of taking this to ANI (yet), I thought you could have a word with him first.

I am aware that it "appears" he is leaving, but we all know the "I'm am leaving" routine. They leave, 24 hours later, they are back. Thanks for your assistance. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 28, 2009 @ 06:42

Yes, I've left a message for you both on his talk page. Less drama from both sides would be appreciated in this matter. "Don't poke the bear" is a phrase to live by. - Dravecky (talk) 07:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I read my part of the note.....exactly what should I do to the WSVG article to make it "neutral" for everyone? To be honest, I thought the way it looks now worked. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 28, 2009 @ 07:03

It's a mass of claims with no inline citations, filled with weasel words like "many listeners", and needs a good grammar polish. You can't discuss relative popularity in the 1980s and hope that the Arbitron link at the bottom of the page will suffice. (Do they even have that data online for paying customers?) SRG may have been incivl but he's not wrong: this article needs inline citations, stat. - Dravecky (talk) 07:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I copied that from a writedown on a former website I hosted (website is long gone). I already wrote it up and it looked good, so I went with it here. If you would like to take a crack at, please feel free. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 28, 2009 @ 07:14

I already took a little poke at it but there's a lot of work to do. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia requires a bit more effort that a hobbyist webpage and that includes being able to cite the text you enter to a reliable source. - Dravecky (talk) 07:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

For example, take a look at KZTB which I just created today. The prose won't win me any literary awards but each statement in the article is properly cited to a reliable source. - Dravecky (talk) 07:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I do that now....that was one of my early early works. It has some mistakes on there, stuff I had to correct (as I went through working on all the pages). I will try to find some references....if I can't....do I take pieces out or what? To be honest, this is the first time I have been in a "reference" mess. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 28, 2009 @ 07:32

OK...looks like something I can do. Just gotta find the references. That is always the tricky part. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 28, 2009 @ 07:34

The text can stay in but it's subject to removal by any editor who cares to challenge it. Plus, I've always found that a search for references turns up all sorts of useful info you didn't even know you were looking for. - Dravecky (talk) 07:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Time for another update, from

Never mind, as you can tell below, Gatoclass got it. Shubinator (talk) 03:40, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Huzzah! - Dravecky (talk) 03:43, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Up for another update? From

Thank you! Shubinator (talk) 21:59, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

On March 29, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article KVXX, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 03:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Would an article that has been around since 2007 be eligible for a DYK mention? - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 29, 2009 @ 04:29

Only if the prose has been expanded to five times its previous length in the past five days. - Dravecky (talk) 04:36, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

It has been expanded alot since 2007, I don't know if it is five times it's previous length though. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 29, 2009 @ 04:40

The expansion has to have been done in the last five days to count. What article are we talking about? If I can see it, I can tell you more. - Dravecky (talk) 10:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry....it would be WINC (AM). I was thinking about a DYK about Patsy Cline. Before making it big, she performed on WINC (AM) several times....and of course she was from Winchester, Virginia, where WINC (AM) is located. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 29, 2009 @ 13:18

If you were to expand it from where it is right now (1838 bytes of readable prose, about 297 words) it would need to be 5x longer, or 9190 bytes of readable prose (about 1485 words), in 5 days (i.e., by April 4th) to qualify for DYK status as a recently expanded article. That's certainly doable, if you have lots of info to add to this article. - Dravecky (talk) 21:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there is that much to add about WINC. I could add about Patsy Cline, but I doubt that would bring it tot he 9190 bytes needed......but I could try. - NeutralHomer • Talk • March 29, 2009 @ 23:14

On March 29, 2009, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles WHOW and WEZC, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 15:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. - Dravecky (talk) 21:07, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

From the WTDR website: Right now, we expect to be on 104.3 FM in Anniston on Thursday, April 30th at 12 noonl, with 99.1 FM in Oxford coming online at th same time, or shorty thereafter. Arob22 (talk) 02:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

You'll forgive me if I don't start holding my breath just yet. - Dravecky (talk) 04:40, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

On March 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article KBZY, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

		WPOR Award: Sponsored in part by the Big Gold Dude .
		You are hereby granted this shiny object for all your hard work at WikiProject Oregon! For your hard work on the radio stations, including the DYKs. Aboutmovies (talk ) 21:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! - Dravecky (talk) 22:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by

talk

) at 20:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.