| Revision as of 13:29, 6 March 2014 editDoug Weller (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Oversighters, Administrators263,788 edits →Old messages to you that your articles were reviewed: r← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:37, 18 March 2014 edit undoThryduulf (talk | contribs)Oversighters, Administrators98,871 edits →Notification of request to amend an arbitration sanction involving you: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 112: | Line 112: | ||
| :I see from that editor, which are just reviews approving pages/edits, and have no negative impact. I don't see a problem, with regards to me. Thanks. --]]] 02:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC) | :I see from that editor, which are just reviews approving pages/edits, and have no negative impact. I don't see a problem, with regards to me. Thanks. --]]] 02:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
| ::Oh there weren't any for you, for new editors whose articles were problematic, they gave them a false sense of approval. Sorry to have bothered you though about this. ] (]) 13:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC) | ::Oh there weren't any for you, for new editors whose articles were problematic, they gave them a false sense of approval. Sorry to have bothered you though about this. ] (]) 13:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
| == Notification of request to amend an arbitration sanction involving you == | |||
| At ], ] has requested an amendment to the ''Doncram'' arbitration case. Specifically they have requested the repeal of the mutal interaction ban between the two of you. You are officially invited to comment on the request on the linked page. | |||
| I am notifying you on their behalf as they are unable to (due to the interaction ban), but I have no other involvement with the request. Thanks, ] (]) 16:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:37, 18 March 2014
New historic building article
Where do you get that number that goes in the infobox?— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 16:06, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, it was already in the county list when I clicked on "edit".— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:50, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- Glad you found your way to an answer. You can also ask/comment at wt:NRHP or look at the wp:NRHPhelp help info for other suggestions. I'm not editing in the NRHP area currently, though. --doncram 19:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Spanish Fork High School Gymnasium
Hello! Thank you for all the work on historical buildings. I was wondering if you are from Utah or if you live there now?
Anyway, I noticed that you seemed unclear about whether the Spanish Fork High School Gymnasium was actually part of Spanish Fork High School. I went to high school there, and that nice art deco building is definitely NOT part of the present day SFHS. It's a good 15-20 minute walk from the present day school, if I recall correctly. In fact, the actual gym of SFHS is a typical 70s era public school piece of crap! See this picture if you're curious. I think they might have rennovated it in 2010, so maybe it's not as crappy now as it was when I was a student. As far as the historic Gymnasium building, I think that Nebo School District Offices has some of its offices there now. I just edited the Gymnasium article as well as the SFHS article to help try to clear this up. Hope this helps.--Jerk of Thrones (talk) 14:11, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for improving the article on the NRHP-listed building! I'm not from the Utah area and have only visited a couple times briefly. I'm not editing in the NRHP area currently. If you have other NRHP-related questions/comments, you can try posting at wt:NRHP and/or look at the wp:NRHPhelp help info. --doncram 19:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
List of television program creators
Following Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 29, it seems to me that creating List of television program creators seems helpful towards developing Misplaced Pages properly. The Category:Television program creators was just deleted, erroneously in my view. In "the industry", creatorship is a clear, well-understood role. Whilst deletion of a useful category seems like a step backwards, this can be remedied by creating a list article, in which referencing can be established, and then restoring the category will follow. Contributions developing it would be appreciated. Draft is at Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/List of television program creators. --doncram 21:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you
Greetings, although my ban will likely be initiated soon (or sent up to Arbcom) I just wanted to take a moment in my last edits here to thank you for your oppose of my ban. Good luck and happy editing. Kumioko 108.45.104.158 (talk) 03:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
You're invited: Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March
| Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March - You are invited! | |
|---|---|
 |
New England Wikimedians is excited to announce a series of Misplaced Pages edit-a-thons that will be taking place at colleges and universities throughout Massachusetts as part of Wikiwomen's History Month from March 1 - March 31. We encourage you to join in an edit-a-thon near you, or to participate remotely if you are unable to attend in person (for the full list of articles, click here). Events are currently planned for the cities/towns of Boston, Northampton, South Hadley, and Cambridge. Further information on dates and locations can be found on our user group page. Questions? Contact Girona7 (talk) |
WikiProject Articles for creation March 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello Doncram:
WikiProject AFC is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1, 2014 to March 31, 2014.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1800 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!
Posted by Northamerica1000 (talk) on 02:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation
AfC submission
Hey Doncram--Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Joseph F. and Anna B. Schrot Farm, Clearfield PA, isn't that up your alley? I don't know what the notability specifics are for such subjects; can you have a look and maybe quickly decline or accept? It's been lingering for a while and I had to block the creator for their username. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 18:34, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Drmies -- I see someone declined it already, but the Shrot Farm is definitely a valid topic; it is item #19 in National Register of Historic Places listings in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania (currently a red-link). It looks like the person worked from the NRHP nomination document, which should be available online. The citation could/should be added and it could be fixed up a bit more, then it is obviously okay and the contributor should be encouraged/rewarded. I am not doing NRHP work now, though, am in fact banned from doing so i guess. Could you post about it to wt:NRHP so that someone NRHP-interested would fix it up and approve it / move it to article space (or if any lurker wants to address it, please volunteer here). --doncram 21:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response and I'm sorry--I certainly didn't mean to rub salt in a wound. One of the lurkers is on it. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- No problem. It seems the contributor was entirely constructive, including adding to the article after it was rejected, but then was treated harshly, in their account being entirely blocked rather than just informing them technically they should request a name-change. Whatever. --doncram 00:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's a "softerblock", which allows them to propose a name change. Drmies (talk) 00:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- This is not specific to anything about NRHP, but rather it is about treatment of a new contributor which could be about any subject, so I'll continue to respond a bit. Drmies, you have got to be kidding, if you think a new contributor will appreciate that they have been given something "softer". I gather they can edit their own Talk page, and submit, as if they would know how!!! a template request to change their name....that is absurd. By their name choice, they do seem to be associated with the topic of the article, which is a good thing if true: they could likely contribute photos and so on. They probably don't have general interest in learning about nuances of wikipedia. IMHO, they simply should be encouraged, and given some help, e.g. adding a proper reference to the supporting documents, and so on, and given some gentle nudging. They are not abusing anything, and blocking the accountname is not necessary if they are not going further. I would simply assume that they do have some association, and point them to wp:COI which explicitly allows for them to make contributions but asks them to disclose their association. And welcome them individually and speak to them in real terms and apologize for the fact that they have only received bot notices or bot-like notices, no real response at their Talk.
- For an alternative example,
tho i can't find a link right nowhere is user talk page, there was not long ago a Virginia editor associated with a house who hadcontributed pics to commons anddeveloped an article at AFC about the house, which was rejected. And it required development, and I simply helped and added references, and encouraged them to add pics to commons which they did, and I pointed out problems gently, including the naming in the article of the current owner which seemed not necessary, and they chose to remove that. And it led to the article being accepted and a good experience. It just seems unfriendly to come down on an editor for a technically improper username, and giving them no welcome or other real human interaction. YMMV. --doncram 01:38, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's a "softerblock", which allows them to propose a name change. Drmies (talk) 00:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- No problem. It seems the contributor was entirely constructive, including adding to the article after it was rejected, but then was treated harshly, in their account being entirely blocked rather than just informing them technically they should request a name-change. Whatever. --doncram 00:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response and I'm sorry--I certainly didn't mean to rub salt in a wound. One of the lurkers is on it. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Television program creator (March 4)
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Television program creator.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.
contributions to Misplaced Pages!
- Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Old messages to you that your articles were reviewed
Take a look at who sent you several messages. Pretty clearly he didn't review them, and so far as I can tell every bit of text he's added to articles that wasn't a template was copyvio. I'm probably blocking him. Dougweller (talk) 18:42, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
- I see these 3 messages from that editor, which are just reviews approving pages/edits, and have no negative impact. I don't see a problem, with regards to me. Thanks. --doncram 02:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Oh there weren't any for you, for new editors whose articles were problematic, they gave them a false sense of approval. Sorry to have bothered you though about this. Dougweller (talk) 13:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Notification of request to amend an arbitration sanction involving you
At Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Amendment request: Doncram, user:SarekOfVulcan has requested an amendment to the Doncram arbitration case. Specifically they have requested the repeal of the mutal interaction ban between the two of you. You are officially invited to comment on the request on the linked page.
I am notifying you on their behalf as they are unable to (due to the interaction ban), but I have no other involvement with the request. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 16:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC)