Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rlevse (talk | contribs) at 15:26, 15 December 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

/RlevseTalkArchive1

TALK Section

Welcome!

Hello Rlevse, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --JiFish(/_Contrib) 15:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

You might want to put this on your user page instead. --JiFish(/_Contrib) 17:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Yvonne Wanrow

Thank you for your comment on the article. Indeed, the justices ruling in the case did find that her gender and ethnicity were factors in her reception of an unfair trial. For more information about why, you can follow the external links or check out the texts used as references from your local library. If you feel that the article is written from a certain point of view, feel free to point out how and why on the talk page, and then to improve it yourself. I also welcome criticisms on my talkpage.--Rockero420 04:29, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

User page/talk page

Hello again Rlevse. There seems to be some confusion about what goes on a person's user page and what goes on their talk page. Generally, Wikipedians use their user pages to describe themselves, their interests, and to gloat about their contributions. Of course, they are free to use the namespace anyway they see fit (within certain limits). A person's talk page, on the other hand, is generally used by members of the community other than the user him/herself to ask questions, make comments, ask for advice, request arbitration, et cetera. In line with this standard, I have moved your comment on the Yvonne Wanrow article from my user page to my talk page. You may want to split up the content on your talk page between your talk and user pages, but of course that is your prerogative. Just a friendly FYI.--Rockero420 18:36, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Merit badges

Thanks for the correction! I'm glad somebody double-checked me on that. I think an article on Merit Badge Collecting would be interesting (I didn't know people collected merit badges), but merging the list would be a bad idea. The list is plenty long to stand alone, and I think it's useful as a separate entity. Tuf-Kat 05:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I've put some notes at Talk:Merit Badge Collecting. Overall, it's a great start! The images are especially well-done, I think. Tuf-Kat 06:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

That was actually on purpose, they were unneeded extra text. Further tabled and subsectioned the article to be readable. Great images though! :) Staxringold 17:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

You really need copyright info on those merit badge images, whether you took them yourself or they are copyrighted property of the BSA. Staxringold 18:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I did get permission to use the images. I took the photo myself and got permission to use them. It's the motif/design that they have the copyright on. A letter with permission is in the works. I wrote on the image tag exactly what BSA legal told me to.Rlevse 18:11, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding your note on my page. I hadn't had a chance to re-check the images QUITE yet, hold on! :) I was just trying to see if I could clean up the prose on the Merit badge collecting page first. If you feel someone is reverting to unfair personal attacks, those can be reported. Otherwise, just as in real life, we have to all put up with different people with different personalities. I think you're doing a fine job with the article, you're really addressing requested changes quickly. --JohnDBuell 20:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Image rationales are looking great, still working through prose and want to give it a good spell/grammar check. One thing I saw in the "Type G" section: "were Foundry Practice, Grasses, Legumes, and Forage Crops (later renamed to Forage Crops)" - uh what? :) What WAS "Forage Crops" prior name? Oh and the person you were asking about is not an admin. --JohnDBuell 20:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm done with my typo/grammar corrections. If you can find that original name for "Forage Crops" I'd appreciate knowing :) --JohnDBuell 20:27, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Ah HA! Let me have another look at that paragraph then and see if it's possible to reword it at all :) --JohnDBuell 21:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes I left the one reference un-numbered - the first two that you had did have superscripts, so I knew that those were specific references. That last one I wasn't sure where you used it, so I was hoping you'd change it into a numbered reference, or tell me where to include it :) I went and got out my uncle's and grandfather's handbooks this morning.... I agree that RebelGuys2 did a GREAT job responding with specific suggestions. Pity they didn't come up when you put the article in Peer Review! I have no idea where to find a reference to the changes of the badges as America changed - seems a little obvious to me really - do you have any of the Requirement books that print JUST the requirements for badges? I used to, but I think they got thrown out :( I'm wondering if they have anything on such changes. Or maybe in Boys' Life? --JohnDBuell 14:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

No I hadn't changed that one reference, I still don't know to which specific item it was referring ;) Actually I think the thing is that it might be obvious to US about the evolution of the badges, knowing US history over scouting's 95 years, but it may not be obvious to non-US residents/citizens. I really don't have a lot of secondary literature on scouting, just four editions of handbooks, copies of the Fieldbook, and a few merit badge books. --JohnDBuell 15:15, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, like I said, it's too bad that these things didn't come out during Peer Review. But at least these are valid, concrete and specific suggestions that can easily be worked on. --JohnDBuell 15:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I concur. Leave a message on Raul654's talk page, ask for the nomination to be withdrawn. Archive the current one, move the article to a new name, rewrite the appropriate parts of it (the Origins section could be dropped, since it was the origins of merit badge collecting, the next section explains merit badges themselves). When you're happy with it, re-submit it under the new name as an FAC. --JohnDBuell 15:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I removed the fac template from the article's talk page. Good luck with the renaming and rewrites - I may not be around for the rest of the day today. --JohnDBuell 16:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding naming: good point. That would only leave potential options as something like Generations of BSA merit badges or Designs of BSA merit badge generations or something else like that. I think you're right, leave it where it is, maybe get some more feedback (is there a WikiProject for Scouting yet?), re-work, and re-submit. --JohnDBuell 18:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Aritcle Size and Search

The reason it is not showing up on the search is probably because it is very new. Give it a few more days. I used a bit of external software to count it for you. I make the wikicode 25,891 bytes. The HTML document will probably be somewhat bigger. I looks featured quality to me. Good luck with that. :) --JiFish(/_Contrib) 21:29, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Merit Badge FAC

Hi, Rlevse, in regards to the FAC, please don't take our comments personally. Please see Wiki's suggestions about staying cool when things get hot. We are all just trying to maintain the standard of FA by only letting in the best articles. If now isn't the time for this article, you can come back as many times as the article needs to get to FA. Thanks. -Scm83x 10:21, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not worried about your point, per se. I'm just letting you know that it's not worth it to get worked up about a FAC. Stay cool and less stress will befall you. Thanks! -Scm83x 11:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

On the Misplaced Pages, we welcome everyone's contribution, regardless of age, race, creed, or any other aspect. I don't know what you mean by "page for people like him" but I will tell you that I had my difficulties with Stax when I first met him. We have become good Wikifriends because we value each other's contributions. Please don't paint with a broad brush. Misplaced Pages is about a community effort in a welcoming environment. Thanks. -Scm83x 11:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Contributions are welcome, but Stax calling his me crazy is highly inappropriate. He's the one that made a personal attack, not me. He's is definitely in need of 'keeping it cool' Rlevse 12:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, there. You found my name, not that it's very difficult to find - stalking much? ;) I'm kidding, of course. As for editing out comments: you never, ever touch somebody else's comments until they have said that the problem has been resolved. Even then, it's best to create a archive page. If you'll see the FA review for The West Wing (television) here, you'll see that someone created an archive page by adding "/SolvedIssuesArchive1" to the end of the URL and linking to it from the main page, and copying and pasted the resolved issues only into that page. Good luck. -Rebelguys2 14:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd be glad to. I'm in the middle of final exams, which is the only reason it's 10:30 AM and I haven't been to bed yet, so I'll probably be around at completely random times for the next week or two. Good luck! -Rebelguys2 16:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

• Please do not misconstrue my words to try and insult me on the talk page of someone I consider my freind. I said your layout was a little crazy and silly, not you. Beyond that, it was. Gigantic images that would literally fill the entire screen on smaller resolutions is not how one lays out a Misplaced Pages article. Beyond that, the definition of a Featured Article is to have brilliant prose, but the bulk substance of your article is in a series of boxes, not prose. Staxringold 13:36, 15 December 2005 (UTC)