This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ebyabe. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
You were the creator of the above article. Do you have any information as to why it is a place of historical interest, which could be added to the text? Thanks. LessHeard vanU21:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I added a bit more info. I stubbed the entire List of Registered Historic Places in Florida, and I didn't want to spend too much time on each one, or I'd have never gotten done. As it was, it took me several months. But I figured at least something existed. Sometimes the hardest thing for folks to do is create an article; adding to an existing one is easier. I did include links in all the stubs as well, as information sources for expansion. Cheers! --Ebyabe17:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
NRHP
What would you call a criticism section to limit its inclusion criteria? For instance, National Register of Historic Places, right now, has a section I have called "Academic criticism" but I want to broaden its coverage to include those within related fields. As academic implies "peer reviewed" I cannot well include a non peer reviewed magazine, Architect in the section as is though an editorial in a June 2006 issue contains relevant criticisms. What to do monfrair? IvoShandor16:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Say hemina-hemina-what? You could just call it "Criticism", if you don't mind being too generic. Or "Criticism", with "Academic criticism" being a subheading. "Intellectual criticism"? No, then you'd have to have "Non-Intellectual criticism". And there's enough of that in the world!
I went on a roadtrip yesterday. Didn't start until noon, and covered near-ish places (within an hour or here). I'm going to go back now to my pretty picture. You making me thinka too much on a Sunday morning. Which is even more gorgeous than yesterday, but I decided yesterday was good enough. Gotta plan out my future roadtrips a bit better. :0 Ebyabe16:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Man, the weather near Chicago is phenomenal too! Sorry to make you think. My main problem here is that I wanted to limit random additions of any joe blow who criticizes the Register. I started with "Criticism," now I have "Academic Criticism". I will have to think on this. IvoShandor18:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm looking out the window and there is not cloud one in the sky, and it's breezy. Which helps since it's getting into the '80s. Wait, I take that back; I can see one wispy lil' cloud near the horizon. We definitely need to take advantage whilst it lasts. :) I understand your reasoning; it's like the "Trivia" sections in articles that invite all sortsa junk to be added. Or fansites, gods help us. Good luck with the cogitation. Sorry I'm not feeling too Jack Handey today. :) --Ebyabe19:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Heh. Oh check it. User:IvoShandor/sandbox2/Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Frank Lloyd Wright collaboration, I dunno, I made a template and we could tag a bunch of articles with it if you wanted, might get a bunch of people interested, perhaps. I don't know if you like the idea of the division page or not. I seem to like to make them, : ), that and groovy templates. Oh and speaking of FLW... Check this, I am really going to try and go, expensive but such a cool opportunity to see something really special, and something rarely seen by the general public, for the most part anyway. IvoShandor07:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I hate to always be beggin' for help but . . . another of my articles is just about ready for Good article candidates, Ogle County Courthouse. It needs some copy editors though, any help is appreciated. Shouldn't be any huge glaring errors or omission but if you note anything other than minor copy edits let me know on the talk page. Thanks (if you have the time of course : ) ).
IvoShandor12:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Fixed some fiddley bits, which is amongst the kind of stuff I like doing. And dude, you've done so much work for the Project, I don't mind at all contributing my little bit. You also always ask nice, which counts big in my book. I like to help, it's one of the things I like about the Wikipedia. If I can make time, I will, and I usually can. Cheers! --Ebyabe12:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
While I'm thinking of it, pictures. The one in the infobox is lovely, imho; one of my favorites you've done. Another one or two pics wouldn't be amiss, though. Especially in that additional section. Like one of the cannons, or the fountain; like that. I have a feeling you've got them somewhere, as you're as much of a photo nut as I am. :) --Ebyabe12:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I have the cannons, and the soldiers' monument, I didn't get the war memorial or the fountain, as I wasn't aware of them (didn't even see the fountain as a matter a fact and the war memorial looked to new to be relevant) because I hadn't discovered HAARGIS yet. : ) Feel free to drop another photo from common in their, there is some of the monument, the cannons are on another hard drive, not at my current locale, but I will grab them in the next couple (luckily lack of photos alone is not enough to fail a GA (I have been participating rather regularly)) according to the criteria. Phew! Okay, I am done, thank you Ebyabe. Is that some kind of weird anagram-like concoction btw? I have always wondered.IvoShandor12:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
It is wonderful to find pictures like that -- and I always do so accidentally. Most of those Florida places have no photos whatsoever. A photo makes it all so much more marvelous! Sincerely, --Mattisse19:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I have trouble finding anything on the commons. I don't know how to look, I guess. There appears to be no way to save galleries on my user page there. So I am always in a fog and run across pictures by accident. Yours, probably I'll never find again -- except now I know there is a User's Page category. But maybe I won't be able to find it again! Sincerely, Mattisse
Thanks for verifying that it isn't just me. I have spent hours hunting around that place for a pic. I find a jewel just enough times to keep me going back. None of their so-called instructions seem to be helpful at all. And unfortuately, very few people seem conscientious about categorising there pics, as you do. So a person never can tell where a picture might be found! Sincerely, --Mattisse19:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
By the way, feel free to change anything I do, as I really don't know much about all this. I just figure (because it works for me) that when there are photos in an articles it inspires people to work harder on it! Sincerely, --Mattisse20:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
AntiVandalBot message
Your recent edit to Shake (song) (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot18:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
DavidShankBone deserves kudos for his current drive to provide quality LGBT photos from the NYC area. One of the more recent photos is posted on Michael Musto, and you can check out the gallery on David's user page.
Project News
There is now the beginning of a list of core topics to possibly be included in the Wikipedia 1.0 release. Your suggestions are welcome; there may be many core LGBT topics still missing.
SatyrTN identified all the articles that were in subcategories of Category:LGBT but not yet tagged with the project's banner, about 1,400 articles. These have been completed, though SatyrBot will make periodic runs through the cats to find any new entries. Thanks Satyr!
The number of articles within our project's spectrum (6,667 currently) should now be relatively stable and only grow with article creation. However, if you find a category that should be included, please let SatyrTN know so it can be included in the bots runs.
Work is underway to improve the LGBT Portal. Please add any good quality (free) photos you come across on LGBT articles to the gallery here. Also if anyone would like to volunteer to help in maintaining the portal, please make yourselves known on the Portal's talkpage.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please drop me a line. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Dev920 know.
From what I have found A-Class reviews are performed at the project level but should require a formalized process, unlike stub, start, and usually B Class articles.
The only hurdle I see to starting up an A-class review at NRHP is that we would have to outline, in writing, some kind of criteria based on, a)other projects b)our own projects needs for articles (what they should include) c)what is written about A-class criteria. My basic assessment is that A-Class is just slightly below GA, which means the GA criteria could be useful in formulating our A-class criteria, because A-Class should basically mean, fix these things and go to GA. It would also make the cool way the template at Talk:University of Illinois Observatory all the more useful, i.e. A class assessment and promotions could be added to the article milestones.
I am thinking, essentially, a toned town version of GA, based on specific parameters and needs laid out by the project. Any thoughts?
IvoShandor12:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
In addition, I have just worked out a rough draft of NRHP A-class criteria. I will need help with the "Project compliance" criteria, as to what you use to do your assessments based upon our project. Feel free to comment on the talk page there. This is just a preliminary outline. I will probably add some specifics kinda like the GA criteria are outlined. IvoShandor14:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Any thoughts? Nice pic for contributing property btw, I haven't seen any plaques like that (exactly) in Illinois. Though most of the contributors to the Sycamore Historic District had plaques with the name of the place, year built and address. IvoShandor16:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
See, the thing about A-Class is that it's on the grading scale between GA and FA. That's confusing, since both those ratings have to go thru peer review. In my random rating mania, I've run into very few articles already rated as A-Class. Which leads me to think I'm not the only one who's assumed that Stub, Start and B were the only ratings not needing peer review.
Meaning? I do like the idea of having a not-quite-ready-for-good-article rating, which is indeed what A-Class seems to be. To throw another option out, see how the WikiProject Korea folks do it. Maybe adding too much complication, but makes one think of other options.
The plaque was a pleasant surprise. Ran across this one in Newberry too. Props to them for doing the historic district thing right. Ironic, since I've been thru there a number of times, when I still lived in Gainesville. Even filmed some pretend-news bits for a play I did a few years ago, in front of both those buildings. Truth is stranger than fiction. :) --Ebyabe17:33, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool. I mean about the play. So it would seem that the Korean project folk don't use a peer review process for A class huh?
I am of the school of thought that it should require a through review by independent editors. Of course, we are free to propose this and go with consensus within our project. It could even be something simple like GA reviews, one editor goes over it based on the criteria and then assesses it, we could even have some list templates that provide the criteria and ratings and such, like at GA, which btw, Ogle County Courthouse is about to become, thanks for the copy edit help on that one btw. IvoShandor06:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
But I like the idea of the noms too, like FA, where its a more open process. We can propose numerous options and see where consensus goes. I will even create sandbox pages for each option.
What did you think of the interpretation of A class criteria. What needs to be added to the "project compliance section," since this NRHP thing was kinda your baby, you may know better than I. IvoShandor06:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Those plaques are freakin cool. Wonder where the hell they got their capitalization lessons from though, heh. Oh, and have you looked at main article National Register of Historic Places lately. A problem has arisen in the main history article, a complaint about it being too bureacratic. Read it over, edit where you can. It's difficult for me to see the objection because the article is about the history of a giant bureacracy. How about that lame collage I did for Property types, : ) IvoShandor06:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Geezly, people are makin' me work today! :) Added some info about the HoYay factor of Rapid Heart and other stuff. Only 'cause I love me the DeCoteau oeuvre. I mean, who else could make an adaptation of The Raven look like this? Btw, see my lil' confab with SatyrTN a couple of sections up. You may find it of The Amusing. Now, stop making me use the higher brain functions and lemme get back to something mindless. Like categorizing the uncategorized and assessing the unassessed, doncha know. ;) --Ebyabe00:20, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi--I've done some recent edits to Lincoln Memorial and saw you edited the info box back in November 2006 to identify the memorial as an "IUCN Category III (Natural monument)" I'm wondering where this info came from. It's not listed in the World Database of Protected Areas; it doesn't seem to fit the description of Category III (cf. article Protected areas); and, as a man-made structure, it's hardly "natural." I don't know much about the IUCN designations; maybe you have additional sources I don't know about. Thanks, RickDC17:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Apologies. When I converted from the infobox back to the protected area one, from the nrhp one that I changed it to before that, I put in the wrong category. I think I had a dyslexic moment, and saw Natural Monument as National Monument. I put it back to the category (V) it was originally. Kinda funny that no one noticed until now... :) --Ebyabe18:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
ROTFL! Thanks for that! And if you ever need some help with anything (not that someone as wonderful, handsome, and fantastic as you would ever need it), but if you do, don't hesitate to leave me a note. Which I'll then ignore! :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)00:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey, Ebyabe! Do me a favor? When you add the nesting functionality to a banner template, would you add the project to the doc? My bot will run a search of articles under that project and let me know which ones to add the WPBS to. Thanks for your work!! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)05:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Added the ones I did, and sorted things a bit, 'cause that's just me. The variety is me doing assessments of various wikiprojects, and adding the nested when it seemed apropos. I'd have added {{WP India}}, but it's protected. Another candidate might be {{WP Australia}}, since they have lots. But both India and Australia have subprojects to them, like {{WPBiography}}, so that mightn't work. Anyway, that's the 411 for now. Cheers! :) --Ebyabe18:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Awesome - thanks! India and Australia have already been done. I started with a list of the projects with the most articles, so I hit them, album, milhist, france, and tried for bio. Theoretically, Kingboyk is going to be making that change to bio today. Yayy :) Thanks again for your help! Just add any new ones you do there, and after the bot runs through the projects' articles, I add the project to the Template:WikiProjectBannerShell/doc. Much appreciated! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)19:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
NRHP
Wikipedia:Peer review/National Register of Historic Places/archive1
We lucked out. Our only peer reviewer is a regular at FAC. Has offered to help advise on the article and left extensive tips to be worked on, which I plan too. Also noted he would name drop some other regs if we needed more help, he thinks this has a good shot once its worked out. I know you are busy on here with your own stuff a lot but might I ask of you this, if you get time, this week, could you stub the following articles (you know this, but at least one reliable source. : ) It would really help me out as I work to bring this bad boy up to FA, and put our main article front and center.
You don't know how much I both loathe and love doing this. This reminds me all too much of writing term papers, which I hated to do. Love the research part, loathed the actual writing. And it's not that I'm a bad writer or anything; I just can't stand doing it for some reason. But I'm pushing thru that for ya, dude. :) They'll be stubs, but at least they should be well-documented stubs, which, Cthulhu knows I should be good at by now. And I am learning some interesting info, which may even help in my pic roadtrips (figuring out historic district boundaries and such). On to the last two! :) --Ebyabe16:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I have learned a boatload of stuff I never knew researching the NRHP for the article. I appreciate you doing this, as I have been busy lately and after this weekend I will be spending most of my time on here trying to work on the National Register article. It would be really great to get this featured, about the DOT, that's probably fine, eventually we will want to create the stub though, it looks like the U.S. code stub for the DOT exists at Title 49 of the United States Code, but its a pretty lackluster stub, we should link it though. IvoShandor16:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Obviously, I am a big fan of writing. : ) Creativity spurs me more than this stuff, but my love for historic preservation and architecture makes this type of writing pretty cool and it sure beats the hell out of covering small town USA city council meetings, or, God help us all, a school board meeting. : ) IvoShandor16:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Also, what do you think of the images in National Register of Historic Places thus far? Any better ideas? Do we have any users in Washington D.C. who are part of the project, or do you know anyone because I found out in an email query to the NRHP (along with the fact that there is no "official seal" or plans to create one for the Register) that the National Register is headquartered in a satellite building from the Main Interior Building at 1201 I Street Washington D.C., 20005, NW. While not the most exciting photo it would be a good addition to the article I think. IvoShandor17:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Of course, this OR right now, the HQ, but if we could find it somewhere maybe the satellite building where they work from merits inclusion, or is it too detailed? IvoShandor17:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
How do you get on JSTOR, if you're not at a library? I can't get anything useful from what I can access outside of a library. Could go to the library, which I drive by most days, but don't wanna. :) --Ebyabe19:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I get home access through the university here. NIU. Most of them have some kind of access for community members too, rather convienent for us non-students, not all libraries allow home access though. IvoShandor20:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I found that Title 49 article earlier, but hadn't suggested it 'cause it's little more than a stub. I mean, it hardly says anything about anything. But it is the correct one, so it will do for initial purposes. But prolly add it to the list of ones to expand. :)
I'm fine with the redirect with possibilities for MPS. It merits a longer article, but that's not high on our list of priorities, eh? :) --Ebyabe12:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Down the road perhaps, yes and a longer article could end up coming out this expansion. After I address the peer review I plan to expand on what we have and see where that leaves us, we made need several main articles including MPS, National Register of Historic Places criteria, etc. IvoShandor12:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Seminole Rest
Your last change to its infobox (on March 26) seems to have made the red locator dot disappear. I am not familiar with the parameters for this infobox, or I would have tried to fix it myself. Thought you would like to know. Happy editing! Chris the speller05:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up. I had to change the infobox template, b/c the dot doesn't seem to want to show up unless it's 8px. It's happened before, but I think I'll leave it at the larger size. :) --Ebyabe20:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
