User talk:Rob Kennedy

I noticed in your edits to Cooking on a campfire that you changed aluminium to aluminum. This is an American English spelling versus a worldwide spelling. As Wikipedia accepts both American English and British English it is best to avoid making such changes. Rmhermen 15:58, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your concern. I’m well aware of the differences in English spelling, and it’s a hornet’s nest I don’t wish to disturb, so when you see that I’ve made an edit of that kind, I assure you that I have not done so carelessly.

Before my edit, the article used aluminium and aluminum with equal frequency. An article should use one spelling consistently, so I had to pick one. I chose the U.S. spelling in part because I am American, but also because the article references a U.S. government Web site. (I recognize that neither is a terribly strong reason, but they were enough to tip the scales for me.) Now that you’ve brought up the topic, I’ve checked the history, and when mention of foil was introduced to the article, it used aluminum. The link to aluminium foil was added later by an American, presumably because that’s the name Wikipedia uses for the article on that topic (although it’s not the only name that links to that topic). --Rob Kennedy 03:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! When tagging pages that violate copyright with {{copyvio}}, please remember to blank the previous content so that only the copyvio notice appears. You didn't do so when flagging Continual prayer, [1] and I've done it for you. Regards, Kimchi.sg 17:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: In a recent edit, you recategorized Q-curvature from Category:Physics to Category:Topology, and in doing so, you removed the {{copyvio}} message from the page. Was that intentional? --Rob Kennedy 21:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. I just wanted to remove the Physics category. Sorry, restored. Karol 06:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've noticed in several articles that people write 1/4 when they should be writing "one-fourth". But that's not as easy to fix with AWB as the vulgar issue. I figure as long as it's in there, it should be the right character.

I did not know that about Tahoma. I use Georgia. I started to change 1/5, 1/6, 1/7, etc., but I noticed Arial doesn't support those, and IE is not as smart about substitutions as Firefox is. It does bother me when we have the two different styles, but we can't have little boxes in the articles where fractions used to be. —Chowbok 14:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I changed my mind about what I said in the first paragraph--if I'm fixing these, I should do it right. From now on, I'm spelling out the fractions when I think it's appropriate, and changing the character otherwise. —Chowbok 15:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your excellent edit summary of your reversion of my edit to the article. It was clearly worded, informative, and proper. I have adjusted my date preferences.

We can always use help in Wikipedia:WikiProject Wisconsin! Royalbroil 13:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.. I noticed you added the "tallest flagpole in the nation" references for Acuity Insurance back in to the article on Sheboygan, Wisconsin. It is my understanding that the wikilinked article, which already contains these references, is considered an internal (wiki) source in such an instance. Take care! 72.131.44.247 18:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea the Acuity article mentioned the flag when I reverted your change today. Without the references in the Sheboygan article, the statistics in that article are uncited. While they are mentioned in the linked article, there is nothing in the Sheboygan article to suggest that the Acuity article is where the reader will find something to back up the stats. So we could explicitly cite the Acuity article there, but I think that’s bad for two reasons. One is that I think it looks a little sketchy for Wikipedia to cite itself. The other is that the Acuity article cites the very same Web page and news article that Sheboygan cites, so we may as well save the reader a step in getting to the source of additional information.

As much as possible, I think the facts of an article should stand by themselves. Readers shouldn’t have to visit another Wikipedia page just to confirm an assertion. That has a side effect that facts mentioned on multiple pages will yield multiple citations to the same external sources. That might sound like a maintenance nightmare, but our sources should be fairly stable, so a change at a source leading to a cascade of changes to all the articles that cite that source should be rare. --Rob Kennedy 19:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you Rob. You can't expect the reader to click links. Each article needs to stand by itself, including its own citations. Royalbroil 23:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it depends on how you count it, but I was probably thinking of airships. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 06:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two people have removed [this image] from the Wisconsin article. The first person called it a fake, and the second disputes whether it really depicts what its captions say it does. That second person is me. I have asked for an explanation at Talk:Wisconsin State Capitol#Capitol view preservation. What is that new building? When was it built? Was there any press coverage of its supposed height violation? --Rob Kennedy 05:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first user, Anonymous (129.89.100.95), was wrong. I don't have the skill to fake such a photo. However, I wouldn't mind if I did :)

I will respond as best I can to your questions. The new building, I am told, is the Dane County Courthouse(!). I understand there was press coverage, from talking to a local reporter, but I haven't seen it. The building may be in technical compliance with the ordinance, but from the angle across the lake the view of the capitol is seriously compromised. Perhaps, if you were standing at the height of the capitol dome, you might see it.

You can see the construction crane starting construction in 2003 in the left photo. By this year the building is complete. Therefore, it was built between 2003 and 2006.

I have sent this photo to the local papers, and at least one plans to do a story about it.

Does that answer your questions?

Thanks for your reply, but then it doesn't make sense in the last case; wouldn't it make the article cohesive and coherent if there was a special section for the {{

sisterlinks}} template? I've tried using ==Related miscellania==. What do you think? Also, what about the footers? They don't fit anywhere, so I thought of putting the footers in ==Related miscellania==. Thoughts please.100110100 04:43, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Viewport? Huh?100110100 11:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw that just after my edit. However, we definitely avoid them in article titles, so for consistency, wouldn't it make sense to keep them out of the article text itself? _└ 

No, I don’t think so. We don’t really avoid them in article titles. Rather, if they appear in article titles, the Manual of Style recommends also providing a straight-quote version of the title as a redirect. This lets readers find the articles more easily since they’re unlikely to type the curly quotes into a search field. --Rob Kennedy 19:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should there be separate articles for the companies and Domino's Pizza its self? Because Domino's Pizza does not refer to any particular company. Domino's Pizza Enterprises is the world's largest franchisee of the Domino's brand. Whereas Domino's Pizza, Inc. is only the second-largest pizza chain in the United States. I believe I have fixed all redirects now. I look forward to your reply on my talk page! Ansett 12:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate your thoughts regarding my suggestion on the MoS talk page Rillian 16:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I recently saw some of your comments at the talk page of

. It deals with the question whether or not Wikipedia should copy non-standard capitalization of personal names (in most cases synonyms and stage names), the alternative being either to dismiss such eccentricities or at least to subject them to the guidelines found in WP:MOS-TM.

The discussion has been going on for a while and by now, I am of the impression that it has already had a lot of input, mostly in favor of dismissing non-standard capitalization and/or applying the trademarks guideline. Regrettably, one of the editors opposed to that notion has proven to be quite insistent that there is still no discernible result. Hence my message, as you appear to be interested in such matters. Regards - Cyrus XIII 22:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was avoiding it, but since you asked so nicely … here. --Rob Kennedy 03:58, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concordia in Milwaukee

Sorry, I neglected to notice the "served by" language in that sentence which now properly includes Concorida. Thanks for correcting my error. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 13:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deutsche Athen in the

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

nicknames list

I'm not trying to be perverse here. I know that within the template format the nicknames should be italicized, and the one in a foreign language should not (the inverse of normal text); but I couldn't figure out how to do that within the template. Can you help? --Orange Mike 18:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I thought that might be what you were going for. All done now. --Rob Kennedy 02:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Green Bay Packers WikiProject!

Hello fellow Wikipedian! I just wanted to let you know that WikiProject Green Bay Packers is looking for participants who are interested in improving the quality of the articles on America's favorite small-town team, the Green Bay Packers! If you want to help, you can your name to our list of participants, check out our to-do list, and most importantly, improve the articles!

Burner0718 (Jibba Jabba) 05:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Motto of the Day Help Request April 2014

Today's motto...

daily grind

.

Nominate one today!

This space for rent

” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to

Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

This message has been sent by

Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category

).

I'm sorry you've stopped editing here; your work was always solid

I assume you're no longer here at UW-M? --Orange Mike | Talk 02:56, 6 September 2014 (UTC) (in the computer lab on the first floor of the Union instead of at Pantherfest)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Edit-a-thon in Madison

Rob Kennedy, I'd like to invite you to an upcoming edit-a-thon:

ART+FEMINISM EDIT-A-THON

• Saturday, March 5th, 9:30 a.m. – noon
• Madison Public Library (Madison, Wisconsin)
• Bring a laptop! There will be snacks and daycare

RSVP on the event page if you plan to attend or have any suggestions. czar 00:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You received this message because you are a member of Category:Wikipedians in Wisconsin. To opt-in to future Madison event messages, add yourself to the mailing list.