| Revision as of 17:16, 20 January 2016 editE.M.Gregory (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users45,004 edits just fyi← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:57, 20 January 2016 edit undoGaijin42 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers20,866 edits →January 2016: {{subst:alert|ap}}Tag: contentious topics alertNext edit → | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
| :::You are at 5 reverts wtihin 24 hours on the page. that you are reverting on different subjects is irrelevant. Please read ]. This was not a threat. It was a warning, informing you of a rule so that you did not break it further. ] (]) 15:11, 20 January 2016 (UTC) | :::You are at 5 reverts wtihin 24 hours on the page. that you are reverting on different subjects is irrelevant. Please read ]. This was not a threat. It was a warning, informing you of a rule so that you did not break it further. ] (]) 15:11, 20 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
| ::::]: I apologize; I thought it would have to be on the exact same subject. This seems extremely restrictive. My last revert was to remove POV, but next time I will ask for the POV to be removed on the talkpage. In any case, I am not interested in reverting anything further, just reaching consensus with the other editors, as the talkpage makes crystal clear. Thank you.] (]) 15:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC) | ::::]: I apologize; I thought it would have to be on the exact same subject. This seems extremely restrictive. My last revert was to remove POV, but next time I will ask for the POV to be removed on the talkpage. In any case, I am not interested in reverting anything further, just reaching consensus with the other editors, as the talkpage makes crystal clear. Thank you.] (]) 15:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
| Again, not a threat, but as you are now active in this area, you should be aware of the discretionary sanctions in place {{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.'' | |||
| '''Please carefully read this information:''' | |||
| The Arbitration Committee has authorised ] to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is ]. | |||
| Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means ] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the ], our ], or relevant ]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as ], ], or ]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. | |||
| }}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> ] (]) 23:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC) | |||
| ==just fyi== | ==just fyi== | ||
Revision as of 23:57, 20 January 2016
| This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Zigzig20s. |
 Archives | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
NRHP plantation stubs
I see you've created many stubs this past month about plantations listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Thank you for your contributions. I do want to mention one piece of advice about these stubs, though. When you create a stub about a place on the NRHP, and you use {{Infobox NRHP}}, if you do not include an NRIS reference number for the site (which can be found in the relevant NRHP county list) in the |refnum= parameter in the infobox, the page is added to the cleanup category Category:NRHP infobox needing cleanup. You can see now that many of your articles have ended up in this category. I have added the reference number as well as some other useful information like coordinates to a few of these stubs just now using a tool created by one of the members of WP:NRHP that can be found here. If you type in a reference number for a site, it will generate a full infobox for the site, which you can copy and paste into the new article as a starting point. If you would like to use this tool to add reference numbers and other information to the articles you've created that are in this cleanup category, that would be much appreciated; however, if not, I or someone else from the project will get around to it shortly. In the future when you are creating articles, though, please try to add at least the reference number to the infoboxes of the new articles so that they will not be placed in the cleanup category. Thank you again!--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 11:12, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- User:Dudemanfellabra: Someone else mentioned this once before and I tried to figure it out, but failed. Where is that number and where do I add it to the infobox please?Zigzig20s (talk) 16:29, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- That was me. You can find the reference number in several places, the easiest is from the county list that lists all the NRHP items for a county. For example, for William Garrett Plantation, it would be National Register of Historic Places listings in San Augustine County, Texas. Find the entry on that list and find the reference number, it is in parenthesis in the Date Listed column. In this case, it is 77001474. You can then access the elkman tool, . Enter that number in the elkman reference number field and click submit. What you get is the complete infobox. Cut and past that into the article, making corrections as needed, architect or building is one (pick either architect or builder, not both on the same line). The architecture might need corrected. If a location is given, check to see if it needs to be adjusted. Give it a try, I'd be happy to help you learn how to do this. I did it for the 20 or so you added a while ago, I hadn't gotten to your new batch yet. As a plus, you'll often also be getting the maps "for free", and won't need to ask for them on the talk page. Generic1139 (talk) 19:38, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- User:Generic1139 and User:Dudemanfellabra: I've just done it with Potton-Hayden House. The map is great. The generated weblink/reference is not useful at all however.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:40, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- If you mean the "NRHP nomination is probably at..." item, the NPS hasn't scanned in everything yet, and Texas is one of the states that hasn't been scanned. You can get details on which state that link will work for on the resource page. For Texas, the Atlas system discussed on the resource has a reasonable success rate, and results in this for Potton-Hayden House. Generic1139 (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- User:Generic1139 and User:Dudemanfellabra: I mean the weblink/reference I added is far more useful than the automatically generated "staff" one, which does not link directly to the specific weblink with the relevant information. Not sure if we can fix it. Now, if you're talking about the fact that the National Park Service has not scanned all their PDFs, that is true. I don't know why they don't do it frankly. It wouldn't cost much to hire a few more secretaries--a better investment than wasting time on "entitlement"--but we can't do anything about that. Unless we send them a Wikipedian in residence? (We'd have to find someone based in Washington, D.C., as I think that's where the NPS is based.)Zigzig20s (talk) 05:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
- If you mean the "NRHP nomination is probably at..." item, the NPS hasn't scanned in everything yet, and Texas is one of the states that hasn't been scanned. You can get details on which state that link will work for on the resource page. For Texas, the Atlas system discussed on the resource has a reasonable success rate, and results in this for Potton-Hayden House. Generic1139 (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- User:Generic1139 and User:Dudemanfellabra: I've just done it with Potton-Hayden House. The map is great. The generated weblink/reference is not useful at all however.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:40, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- That was me. You can find the reference number in several places, the easiest is from the county list that lists all the NRHP items for a county. For example, for William Garrett Plantation, it would be National Register of Historic Places listings in San Augustine County, Texas. Find the entry on that list and find the reference number, it is in parenthesis in the Date Listed column. In this case, it is 77001474. You can then access the elkman tool, . Enter that number in the elkman reference number field and click submit. What you get is the complete infobox. Cut and past that into the article, making corrections as needed, architect or building is one (pick either architect or builder, not both on the same line). The architecture might need corrected. If a location is given, check to see if it needs to be adjusted. Give it a try, I'd be happy to help you learn how to do this. I did it for the 20 or so you added a while ago, I hadn't gotten to your new batch yet. As a plus, you'll often also be getting the maps "for free", and won't need to ask for them on the talk page. Generic1139 (talk) 19:38, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- User:Generic1139 and User:Dudemanfellabra: Perhaps one of you could add a map quickly to Stone Hall, Nashville, which has been nominated for DYK?Zigzig20s (talk) 09:46, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Done Generic1139 (talk) 14:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Generic1139: Thank you. Feel free to expand the page if you can. I was pleasantly surprised that User:Human3015 nominated it for DYK.Zigzig20s (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Mohamed Hadid
 | On 4 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mohamed Hadid, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that devout Muslim Mohamed Hadid, a lifelong teetotaler, owns a 5,000-bottle wine cellar and a Beverly Hills winery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mohamed Hadid. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Stone Hall, Nashville
Hi, thanks for creating article Stone Hall, Nashville. I am going to nominate it for DYK and hopefully it will feature on main page. Currently article has enough length for that purpose, still I request you to expand article by 3-5 lines, that will be better. You can expand it by using existing sources or you can find new sources. I just saw your message on my talk page. You can also fix some issues. I will try to improve article further. Thank you.--Human3015 12:59, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, I have created this nom. You can improve hook or can suggest another hook. Thank you.--Human3015 13:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Thomas J. Latham pic.
Interested in this? Let me know if so.- Nunh-huh 05:53, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- User:Nunh-huh: Yes please! But there is a "copyright" sign--are you sure it's in the public domain? Btw, I tried to find it on the National Register of Historic Places listings in Shelby County, Tennessee, but it may have been demolished.Zigzig20s (talk) 05:55, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- I don't see a copyright there, but even if there is one it doesn't mean anything. It's a 1901 postcard, so clearly it was published before 1923. (The photo part, not the words on the back). So there's absolutely no problem in using it, even if someone claims copyright. - Nunh-huh 08:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
N. S. B. Gras
Hey there. N. S. B. Gras was probably camera shy. Even if I found one it would likely have a copyright. Only photos published before 1923 are public domain. Keep up the great articles and I'm happy to upload photos. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:10, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
January 2016
Your recent editing history at Hillary Clinton shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- User:Gaijin42: I believe you are misinformed. Can you please explain why you believe I might be "edit warring"? I don't believe that I am. I only reverted the "politician" word in the first sentence of the lead once, not three times. I then proceeded to discuss it at length with the other editors, until I felt there was no consensus for it and discontinued that conversation. The same thing is going with the "net worth" issue, though at least two editors agree with me that this referenced piece of information should remain in her article. Please don't try to intimidate me with idle threats. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:06, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- You are at 5 reverts wtihin 24 hours on the page. that you are reverting on different subjects is irrelevant. Please read WP:3RR. This was not a threat. It was a warning, informing you of a rule so that you did not break it further. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:11, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- User:Gaijin42: I apologize; I thought it would have to be on the exact same subject. This seems extremely restrictive. My last revert was to remove POV, but next time I will ask for the POV to be removed on the talkpage. In any case, I am not interested in reverting anything further, just reaching consensus with the other editors, as the talkpage makes crystal clear. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- You are at 5 reverts wtihin 24 hours on the page. that you are reverting on different subjects is irrelevant. Please read WP:3RR. This was not a threat. It was a warning, informing you of a rule so that you did not break it further. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:11, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- User:Gaijin42: I believe you are misinformed. Can you please explain why you believe I might be "edit warring"? I don't believe that I am. I only reverted the "politician" word in the first sentence of the lead once, not three times. I then proceeded to discuss it at length with the other editors, until I felt there was no consensus for it and discontinued that conversation. The same thing is going with the "net worth" issue, though at least two editors agree with me that this referenced piece of information should remain in her article. Please don't try to intimidate me with idle threats. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:06, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Again, not a threat, but as you are now active in this area, you should be aware of the discretionary sanctions in place
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Template:Z33 Gaijin42 (talk) 23:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
just fyi
Thought you might be interested in this Persian immigrant candidate Anna Kaplan. Cheers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:16, 20 January 2016 (UTC)