Hi, Brian. I noticed on the Cleveland page that you went back and forth on the state route/highway designations. Whether a state road is a "highway" or "route" doesn't seem to have a universal definition and usage, even among we engineers who design them. ODOT calls them state routes. I've seen them all called routes, as in "Route 66" for U.S. Highway 66, and the FHwA designation "Interstate Route 77" for I-77. I've seen them all called highways. Personally, I typically call them state routes, U.S. highways, and interstates to differentiate. The designations in the Cleveland article would probably read "state route" if ODOT had written them. Your entry - your call. MARussellPESE12:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You're right about that, Michael...I think every state DOT calls them something different. :) I actually just had a brain fart while editing that section and substituted "state route" where it should have been "state highway". The only reason I did it that way was to conform to what seem to be the Wikipedia style guidelines for highways that aren't Interstates -- their articles are always titled "(name of state) state highway ###" (or U.S. highway ###, or (name of province) provincial highway ###)...you get the idea. Personally, I just call them by the numbers, which is terribly confusing to anyone who doesn't know what you're talking about. Thanks, though -- PacknCanes15:52, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you asked for the peer review!
Hi Brian,
I'm glad to see that we are getting some constructive suggestions for the Cleveland article. I hope we'll be able to build some momentum for addressing the remaining shortcomings so that the article about this city can shine! Mamawrites19:12, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Concerning the headings for neighborhoods, I'll leave it to you to decide, but I just think that a single sub-heading doesn't look right (especially if there isn't a second sub-heading to accompany it). As for the cityscape, I was thinking about the general appearance of the city (modern or classical architecture, park-like or industrial setting, etc.). It doesn't have to be long nor does it have to be included. If you do decide to include it, see Ann Arbor, Michigan, and Louisville, Kentucky, for examples. Pentawing03:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The population estimates are five years old, and surely fluctuate by hundreds, or even thousands, each month. Therefore at the top, express as 'more than', and not to the last person (thousands is precise enough for your purpose here). In the demographics section, cite the exact count in the census, but use past tense—'were' etc—when referring to the 2000 census. 'Cleveland was hit hard by white flight and suburbanization,'—during what period, exactly? Relate directly to the info in the table.
Unless it's a very thorough edit, I'll be back to give a few more examples as reasons that it still isn't FA standard. Surely you can find a collaborator who's good at editing? One of your local librarians or school teachers?
Howdy. Thanks for starting the cityscape section. Sorry I couldn't get to it, but I've been absolutely swamped today. I have a few changes I'd like to make, but they'll have to wait until later today or tomorrow. Thanks again! - EurekaLott22:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations on Cleveland being featured. Now that the article is featured, I would suggest that you archive the current talk page. As a side note, since you got Cleveland featured and your user page suggests that you might do the same with Raleigh, North Carolina, you might be interested in this project: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities. Again, congratulations with getting Cleveland featured. Pentawing03:55, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The credit belongs to you, my friend. It seems the path to featured article status is as much about good communication as it is about quality content, and you have a knack for smoothing ruffled feathers when the inevitable miscommunications occur. Good work! - EurekaLott14:22, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Date for work to be released into public domain
Hi Carnildo,
Since you seem to be the resident expert on copyright law, could you do me a favor? I'd like to use this photo in the article about Cleveland. It was taken in 1927, so has the copyright run out on it? I seem to remember somewhere that there's a limitation of 70 years for anything published before the late '60s (?), but I'm not sure. If it isn't public domain, I just won't use it; I don't really feel like jumping through all the hoops necessary to fair-use it. Thanks! PacknCanes | say something!17:24, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm hardly an expert on copyright law -- it's an extremely complex subject even for someone with a law degree. For this particular image, I can't tell for sure if it's public domain or not. Everything published before 1923 is public domain, while those published between 1923 and 1963 without the copyright being renewed are public domain. Two ways to find out for sure would be to check the Library of Congress, or to contact the site owners. For a basic overview of what is and is not public domain, Cornell's got a chart at [1].
Greetings. You've recently been involved with working on get articles up to featured status, so I wanted to let you know about a new page, Wikipedia:Bounty board. People have put up monetary bounties for certain articles reaching featured status - if the article makes it, the bounty lister donates the stated amount of money to the Wikimedia Foundation. So you can work on making articles featured, and donate other people's money at the same time. If this sounds interesting, I hope you stop by. – Quadell(talk) (bounties)13:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Top job! I think I've eliminated all the one-sentence paragraphs as well as the external links... anything else to have a go at so you can change your objection?
I thought I'd alert you to the fact that User Redwolf kindly nominated me for adminship last week, which I accepted. Regrettably, this has coincided with a stouch with several huge egos whose FAC I helped on, and then critiqued after they'd trashed my entire contribution. I normally shun conflict, but here, I'm emersed in it, and I feel utterly destroyed. One of the protagonists appears to be drumming up support for his cause on other people's talk pages.
If the nomination fails Monday night, which appears likely now since the 75/25 voting balance is borderline, I'll be trashing my personal page and not returning: it's just too embarrassing and unpleasant to go on.
So, if you have the inclination, the war zone is at: [2]
Thanks, but it doesn't allay my grief. How fun can turn to distress and depression in an instant. The process is flawed when it turns into a referendum on someone's perceived personality, character, maturity. There's a herd mentality at work, too.
I think it should be depersonalised, at least to some extent. There's too much scope for unsubstantiated tittle-tattle and highly POV 'moral' judgement. Numbers, ticks against various criteria, and no allowance for changing your vote on the whim of what others in the herd say, would be a start. Much stricter guidelines for comments. I'm outa here when this thing fails Monday night, feeling kind of ... angry, and hating WP.
Thanks for that piece of encouragement. The article size limit is due to something I picked up from Nichalp, who implicitly pointed out that anything over 40 kB can pose a problem. Though current high-speed connections and browsers do not have a problem with large article sizes, there are some people who do not have such luxury (e.g. they have early versions of certain browsers and (GASP!) dial-up connections). Anyways, I decided to take care of some concerns, but I am hoping that the article does make it to featured status, given that I have other projects in the pipeline. Pentawing22:29, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I contacted
Chicago, Illinois). If you wish, you can also talk to him about this in order to resolve the issue. In fact, I would appreciate someone helping me with this since now I find myself being pulled in every direction. Pentawing23:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply
]
I decided to place the article size limit to 45 kB and start expanding. I realize your concerns about article sizes, but unfortunately Nichalp happens to be seen as an expert when it comes to city articles, and his opinions (no matter how much one disagrees with them) are generally respected (especially by Raul654, who controls which articles finally become featured). Nevertheless, I appreciate your willingness to help if possible and respect your concerns about possibly starting a flame war. However, I also realize that sooner or later this issue is going to come up, where people are going to wonder why article sizes matter (a holdover from the early days of Wikipedia, but I think it should deserve another look, given that I recently read about the fact that 32 kB can only contain about 6000 words, compared to a normal encyclopedia which has about 50,000 words per article). Again, I'll let you know what I encounter with my contact with Nichalp. Pentawing01:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Boston is finally featured. Nevertheless, Nichalp said that the article has ballooned and that it could be summarized (the article is currently at 41 kB). At the moment, I am a bit weary of working on the article further and will move to other things unless something major comes up. Nevertheless, I will try to figure out something that could hopefully resolve this issue (maybe a balanced mix of having the article give as much of an overall of the topic as possible in conjunction with summarizing materials into sub-articles when the article reaches a certain size such as 40 to 45 kB), though if you have an idea that could help, I would appreciate it. Pentawing22:05, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
From the article's talk page, I saw that you decided to try to improve the article to FA. However, the sandbox where the new format is located (which I found after looking at your "user contributions," which is one of the links in "toolbox") isn't linked. If you wish for more people to help out, I would suggest you link the temporary article directly to the Raleigh, North Carolina, article's talk page. Pentawing01:09, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You're doing a great job with the Raleigh page. It's looks better than the Charlotte page. Raleigh have many attractive and nice shopping centers. I would love to see a culture/attractions section on the Raleigh page-with the upscale shopping center and restaurants on Six Forks Road and Crabtree Valley Mall. Tracey (April 4, 2011) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.50.189.141 (talk) 23:13, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--Loodog00:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply
Dear PacknCanes! You are receiving this newsletter because you have signed up as a member of WikiProject Ice Hockey. The purpose of this newsletter is to update on the goings on of the project, as there have been major changes, and a lot of new recognized content in the past few weeks. If you are an inactive user, you probably won't recognize the new and improved state of the WikiProject!
In the past few weeks, there has been quite heated discussion about the use of diacritics in article name. The current guideline is using diacritics in the pages of articles of all player names which require them, but redirects are exempt.
By Maxim
There have been two new task forces started within the WikiProject to coordinate major topics.
Sweden Ice Hockey task force
This task force was initiated by
Featured article status. It covers all Swedish clubs, leagues and competitions and associated articles, players and coaches that are Swedish, or have played/coached for a Swedish club, and arenas in Sweden. They plan to eventually operate as a sort of a sub-project, which will have its own articles for creation, ranking importance and quality of articles, and co-ordinate article improvement. Its current members are Krm500, Bamsefar75, and CLAES
Featured Topic status. Although it currently meets the required article count, the task force wishes to improve it further. Its area of coverage is very similar to the Sweden Ice Hockey task force. Its members are Bsroiaadn, JHMM13, FutureNJGov, Sportskido8, Michael Greiner, JRWalko, and Soxrock
. The page has been quite popular; since it was created on July 21, there have been six completed requests. There are four currently outstanding requests:
By Maxim
On July 12, Kaiser matias announced that he had completed assessing all the articles with a {{ice hockey}} tag, sorting them into Category:Unassessed Ice Hockey articles. Kaiser matias has ranked about 9000 articles in that category, and most were stubs, and "have no information at all", according to him. Everybody is encouraged to expand the stubs into real articles. This effort took around 5 months. A big thanks goes to Kaiser matias from me and all the project.
Note: You have received this newsletter because you have added your name
Dear PacknCanes! You are receiving as you are a member of
WP:HOCKEY, and I think this will help you to stay informed. Since the last newsletter sent out in August, there's been great changes. Read on to find out! Maxim(talk)
has been given A-Class status due to multiple issues raised at FLC.
^The last one, List of Calgary Flames players, is the only one not associated with the featured topic drive.
WP:FLC
and 2 lists in the "Holding cell", as there's been an accepted guideline to not put more that 5 trophy lists at the same time to, "compensate for the sanity of the reviewers".
project page if you are interested in helping out. Although it's closer to being done than not, there's still work to be done. The next topic that might be tackled is Stanley Cup
, but this remains purely speculative and in discussion.
Note: You have received this because your name is on
claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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