User talk:Freekee

Welcome!

If you're new here at Wikipedia, welcome! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me here on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

If you wish to talk to me, edit this page. Just click the "New Secion" ink in the menu bar. Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Watch this page for my replies. I prefer to keep discussions centralized. If you want to reply to a comment here, add your comment directly below the comment you wish to respond to. Begin it (and each paragraph) with a colon (:), or with one more colon than was on the previous comment, to indent.

In Case You're Interested

Just thought I'd quickly mention something: I noticed that you contributed a lot to the Hipgnosis article (great article by the way). Well, I host/produce an internet radio program called "Fewsh" that airs 6-8pm EST Monday evenings on gtownradio.com (it's run out of Germantown, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) and tomorrow (June 22, 2009) I happen to be spinning only albums with covers by Hipgnosis! Check it out if you so desire. BurtonM (talk) 16:27, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your query, I added the link because I felt that it was appropriate to have the band's site there because not enough information had been provided on the band members, particularly on the 'Horns of Dilemma' who had not been mentioned at all in relation to the Violent Femmes. I have added a more specific link now, which pertains to more personal information on the band, the HoD, and also anecdotes about the band and their experiences together.

I am aware that Wikipedia articles should stand on their own, but when discovering the Violent Femmes I think it would be helpful to have a link to the Violent Femmes site itself, perhaps at the bottom of the page under 'additional links' or something. Being relatively new to Wikipedia, and having had my edit challenged, I leave this to the discretion of more practised Wikipedians.

I have to say, on looking at the discussions here concerning the Violent Femmes, it seems that some excessively aggressive debating is going on, and I think that the page should not be so aggressively disputed. It seems that I stepped onto a bomb site when editing, for which I apologise. Ecoelen2k 23:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Violent Femmes

It's on my watchlist. If you are interested in working on music articles, you should check out WP:ALBUM, and its talk page, which is where the guidelines for albums are, and also take a look at Smile (album) which is, as far as I know, the only featured article on an album that we have (not ideal!). Revolver (album) is currently having a lot of work done upon it, and may be close to featured article status as well. As for creating articles on re-issues, I would encourage people to expand the original album article with that information, and only when that article becomes too long to split any information off. Jkelly 17:44, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh hey, oops. I did not mean to edit that out...it was in the midst of doing other things. I will put it back in, I know nothing about the Violent Femmes so I have no dog in the fight. TKE 20:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On reviewing my change, I think I viewed it as speculation. Seeing your contributions, I stand by putting it back in as you make a compelling case. TKE 02:30, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

n/s

I'm pretty bad about previewing my changes. Jkelly 04:54, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Wikiproject Albums

I thought I would answer your question here since you are probably not checking back on the talk page for WP:Albums. - As far as I know, quotes are required on the discography lists for singles as well. As for the redlinks on albums, they are probably a bad idea, and they are probably not mentioned here because most redlinks for albums would be found on the band's page and not an album page. So I would try to refrain from redlinking albums unless you plan on making a page for the album in the near future. I hope this answers your question. Weatherman90 00:01, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Violent Femmes' first album

Violent Femmes' first album was released in 1982, see http://vfemmes.com/disc-vfemmes-1.htm. Let's not get into an edit war on the release date. Mike Garcia 05:20, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: plural versus singular, on band names

Now I replied on Talk:Violent Femmes. Mike Garcia 02:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Gufs

How did you hear about The Gufs? They seem to be limited to Wisconsin. I think its funny how you found that article's author by checking out the author of a seemingly unrelated article!! Do you like my pic from the pits? Do you think its too gutsy displaying my pic? Royalbroil 22:32, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for inspiring me to listen to some songs from The Gufs. Smile is such a great tune! I wish I still lived in Sheboygan so I could hear the song on the radio from time to time.
You can add any Wisconsin bands to the List of bands from Wisconsin. I took the liberty of adding Mrs. Fun. Make sure they have blue links or they will have to be removed (I haven't added my cousin's band from Milwaukee because they are not notable according the WP:MUS guideline). Royalbroil 04:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My cousin is in Signal to Shore. Royalbroil 05:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"moved categories from category to artist"

Hi. Do you know if there any's consensus or policy on this? It seems to be a total mishmash at the moment. Please reply on my talk page or at Talk:Jimmy Cauty. Thanks. --kingboyk 15:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at Talk:Jimmy Cauty. Thanks for asking. -Freekee 15:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gorcrows

Hi there. Thanks for the comments about Gorcrows. I agree that having it at the plural name is wrong. I will correct that when I have the time. As for the category, well, that part of the category system is not perfectly organised yet. There are several other things there that aren't really "races", but have been put there until someone puts them somewhere better. I've got that on my list to sort out as well. As for whether or not Gorcrows should be in the category system (by categorising the redirect), I think they should be. The category system is not meant to be used instead of a search, rather it is a browsing tool to complement searching. ie. browsing is different from searching. I think readers should be able to find Gorcrows by: (a) browsing (hence the category); (b) searching (hence the mention in the Mewlips article); and (c) following links from existing articles (only one article links to Gorcrows at the moment). I don't really mind if you put the redirect up for deletion, but I would present these arguments against it if you did. Plus the argument that the edit history before redirection needs to be preserved (not so important here, but often important in other cases). I hope that's answered some of your concerns, and thanks again for the comment. Carcharoth 23:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I think the only thing we still disagree on is whether these redirects from "articles that have been merged into larger articles" should be categorised in article categories. I think they should, but I do see your point that people clicking on it from the category might expect an article, rather than a redirect. I may move these kind of redirects into a "minor FOO" category, similar to the "minor characters" lists that Wikipedia has. To some extent though, I think the message "redirected from FOO" at the top, helps the reader understand what has happened. Carcharoth 09:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Deleted comment at the Village Pump

It's still there. I don't know what you're talking about. SilentRage 22:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see it at the bottom. Somebody must have fixed it. SilentRage 03:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of bands from Wisconsin

I noticed that they got rid of all of the states' articles. Check this out: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States musicians. I thought about doing an administrative review of the deletion, since they didn't bother to add the article to all of the states' pages. How could anyone have know that their state's list was about to be deleted? I decide not, because 1) the article was so difficult to maintain, 2) frequent vandalism, and 3) needed constant checking to keep off the red links. Doing it by categories FORCES the band to have an article, so I think its a better way. The down side is that noone thinks to look for a category, when it should be a list. You can review the administrative review procedures somewhere on the WP:AFD article if you choose. I gonna let this one pass. Whoever deleted the article should have cleaned up the dozens of red links that they created in Wisconsin. I wonder how many hundreds of red links they created nationwide. I wonder if I could use my AWB to clean it up.

I'm still listening to The Gufs CD in my car since you contacted me. I saw them a few weeks ago at Oshkosh for the first time! They were excellent. Thanks for your comments! Royalbroil 03:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see the article tagged for AFD. The list was on the WikiProject Wisconsin watchlist, so I most likely would have seen the change, although I haven't been on wikipedia very much this weekend. I bet they could bring the article back for a short time so you could populate the category. I don't think they followed a proper procedures by deleting states' articles without nominating each and every state. It sure doesn't look like it from the AFD link that I gave you. I occasionally participate in the AFD voting. Royalbroil 03:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have also left a message on the closing admin's talk page complaining about the number of red links that were created that should have been fixed. Royalbroil 04:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating categories for those articles. It looks like the lists are gonna be deleted. I have awarded you the "outspoken barnstar" for your efforts! --Royalbroil 02:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your appreciation, but the star seems to be meant for political discussion. And though it took me a couple of nights to populate the categories, and I did bring the matter to the public, I'm not sure I deserve a barnstar for it. :-) But thanks for noticing. And thanks for watching those list pages in the first place. -Freekee 03:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I stand behind giving you a barnstar. I have changed it to a THUMBS UP award, though. Per Wikipedia:Barnstars: "It is the custom to reward Wikipedia contributors for hard work and due diligence by awarding them barnstars." You were bold and your diligent actions set a wonderful precident for something inheritantly wrong with AFD. I don't think that barnstars should be given out easily, just in rare exceptional cases like this. --Royalbroil 02:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. That, I'll take. :-) Thank you very much! -Freekee 02:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

X-American list proposal

Hi, I am contacting you as you have expressed some interest in the current arguments over lists of X-Americans. I would appreciate if you could have a read of my proposal and state whether you support or oppose it Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Rules for lists of X-Americans. Thanks! Arniep 11:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your edits to unincorporated

Please respond at Talk:Unincorporated area. Thanks. --Coolcaesar 09:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing of own picture

You can use {{No rights reserved}} -Nv8200p talk 21:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Hi,

When you get a chance, please check the music WikiProject discussion page for my reply to your last response. --Cheers, Folajimi (leave a note) 01:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category free use images

Thanks for taking the time to let me know I had added a private page to a category by mistake. I appreciate that. --cda 13:06, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


List of Wisconsin state parks

I'd like to consult with you on your recent edits to Wisconsin state park system pages. There's a wonderful neatness to the changes, but officially all state parks and state recreation areas, some of the state forests, and a few other oddball designations (e.g. the Scenic Waters Areas) are all part of the Wisconsin state park system. The official list is here on the WDNR website. I'm concerned that separating out the various designations masks that they are all administered together as one system. Whether a site is designated a state park or state recreation area sometimes seems to be a matter of legislative expedience rather than a difference in quality. Moreover, some WI state forests are administered by the Division of Parks and Recreation as part of this system, and others by the DNR's Division of Forestry as non-recreational, sustainable forests. Listing the Parks and Rec forests together with the other state park units clarified this division. Just something to think about; I'm interested to hear your views. McGhiever 13:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. The reason I went ahead with separating them (aside from the obvious), was the heavily crosslinked "see also" sections. My only problem with doing it in separate lists were the odd types like scenic waters and a few others. I'd be okay with combining them back if we can make sure the names and descriptions of the lists work, and also that they are searchable. Like calling it "List of Wisconsin state parks, forests and recreation areas" (or something, since that's very long), and then leaving the current lists as redirects to it. I wouldn't be opposed to putting all three categories in Category:Parks in Wisconsin. Any suggestions? -Freekee 01:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Free use images category?

You made a comment on my talk page (User_talk:Ron_Johnson) about putting nowiki tags on something I'd uploaded. I'm not sure what you're talking about, but I presume you can just go ahead and do whatever you were discussing. Again, I'm not sure what you were referring to exactly, so I can't be more specific.

I'm sorry, I don't contribute to wiki* projects anymore, the deletion activities I've seen piss me off, so I choose to make no further contributions, other than the odd comments, like this one. I also don't check my talk page very often anymore. --Ron 22:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Botched Fix

Thanks for catching that!

Ursatz 05:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SIG

Thank you for the concern. I am aware of WP:SIG, but after probably 8k edits since I started using the sig (2k in ~~~~ marking), it hasn't been a problem. Thanks again and cheers! -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 06:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD comment

Re: this: I myself thought about writing some joke comment saying, "This is spam. Don't do it again or you'll be blocked." But as someone might have taken that a bit to seriously, I'd say your comment was a safer way to go. :-) Heimstern Läufer 05:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 (Violent Femmes album)

I'm confused by your message. The article has only one source. I used the one-source tag. Why would I want to use a different one, and which one would you recommend? If I'm missing something, please point it out. Rklawton 04:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged it thusly because I saw only one source cited. I see billboard information, but I see no source for this information. The article should indeed be expanded to include reviews, but that's a separate issue. Rklawton 04:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's a new day, and a see your point. I'll fix the tags accordingly. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Rklawton 15:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

let's get freaky freekee!

that was just waiting to be said 75.75.127.19 02:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10cc awards

Thanks for your comments re the long list of certification awards at 10cc. Can you please clarify a couple of things, though: what did you mean by saying "I think a better place for charting info is the album article." My question was specifically about the list of UK certifications rather than chart details. I think the chart details for their discography works OK, but I think gold/platinum etc certifications (if they're important at all) belong in the Wiki article for each album rather than the 10cc article.

Could you also please elaborate on your suggestion that "The band article could use a summary". The 10cc article is a fairly comprehensive one, but it has become rather come complicated in the last month or two with the addition of the large number of subheads that split up the band's early years. Your thoughts would be appreciated: reply here and I'll put your talk page on Watch. Thanks, Grimhim 04:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, I meant "certification details," rather than "charting details." In my mind, they are similar subjects. I've never been a big fan of charting info, and not much more for certification details. Especially "silver" - that doesn't seem very notable at all. I prefer to see info about an album in that album's article. In the band article, a summarized description of the certifications is fine. Something like, "the band had eight gold records in the UK, beginning with their third album. Only one went platinum..." That's what I meant by including a summary - to summarize the info in question. Charting info is not as bad in the discography, because it helps to see it all tabulated in one place. For that reason, you could add the certs to the discog too (even though I personally don't care for it). I see I didn't say all that very clearly in my original comments. You could have asked for clarification there. :-)
Question for you. Are you a big fan of 10cc? Do you own all their records? I want to know the cover artists for Ten Out of 10, Windows in the Jungle and ...Meanwhile. Can you help? -Freekee 04:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good points -- thanks. The awards were added by a new user who, under his username and an IP address, has been adding a bucketload of crap to the 10cc article, much of it pilfered from a fan website, for the last few days. Most of it I've deleted. He has also been blithely adding images sourced from who knows where and ignoring the copyright violation warnings on his talk page. As for the designers of the cover images -- no problem. I'm at work at the moment, but I'll check the albums tonight when I get home. Grimhim 05:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, found those albums. Ten out of 10 cover design is credited to Visible Ink; Meanwhile is Laurence Dunmore (design & art direction) and Windows in the Jungle is STd. Whatever STd is. [[1]] is an excellent resource if you're after more. Oh, and I boiled down the certifications and kept them at the main 10cc page for the moment. Thanks again. Grimhim 13:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The certification section looks fair. I just thought of another way you could do it. You could put asterisks in the discography table. One for silver, two for gold and three for platinum. Just an idea. Thanks for checking on the cover artists. Many of their covers were done by Hipgnosis, and I wanted to make sure those weren't too. Happy wiki-ing! -Freekee 05:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mmmm, not sure about the asterisks, since they apply only to the UK. I'm kind of over it. Hey, there's a recurring issue on both the 10cc and Consequences pages I just cannot fix. Check out the references and see if you can work out why for one reference on each, the website re-direction thingy doesn't work. The markup is identical to other references that have a website, but for some reason a square bracket remains visible, as does the entire URL. I've tried a dozen ways to get them to behave, without success.Grimhim 12:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No idea. There were double curly braces at the end of the one reference, so I removed them. That fixed the problem... in that reference. It showed up in another. Ref #2 is messed up now. I can't figure out what's wrong with it or the one on the 10cc page. I recommend trying the technical side of WP. Like maybe Wikipedia:Bug reports.
Will do. It's a puzzle. The curly bracket was actually the end of the breakout "cquote" markup that stuck in the big quote marks at the end, so I replaced them. Thanks anyway.Grimhim 03:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry about that. Funny how it fixed note 4 anyway. -Freekee 03:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

I happened to find User:Freekee/Sandbox via this Google search. I just thought I'd point out that you can now use {{Template:Infobox Album/doc/type|color=Color}}. ;-) --PEJL 05:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but you can use Template:Infobox Album/link/doc#Unit test and Template:Infobox Album/color/doc#Unit test for such tests. --PEJL 17:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice (album by The Nice)

I've just created this page but the redirect from The Nice took me to an empty page for Elegy, which is a different album. I'm sure this will turn up in your watchlist but if I've goofed badle, please let me know. --Rodhullandemu 15:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice, changes in progress. I've not created an album page before so you might have to hold my hand, er, metaphorically speaking. --Rodhullandemu 16:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This should be just about finished; I've also put up a page for Elegy_(Nice_album) and put a lot of stuff into Second_Light if you'd care to check it out when you have time. In particular external reference 3 is in fact an internal reference but I wanted it to link without showing the title & I'm not sure this is the right way of doing it! Cheers. --Rodhullandemu 15:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Please note that personal attacks specifically "They seem to feel that the results justifies being an asshole." are unwarrented. If you have an issue with something I do, feel free to approach me in a civil manner than make personal attacks. Thank you! — Moe ε 06:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I generally do copy-and-paste a message about the removal of images, but I assumed this was going to be a fairly uncontroversial action. I went back to the talk page to discuss this if there was a matter, and found his thinly veiled personal attack on whomever removed the images, which just happened to be me, and that doesn't exactly prompt me to be the nicest person in response. Then TallulahBelle went on various noticeboards to go on and say that I was committing 'vandalism' by removing the images (and BTW the noticeboard it was last asked on said the images should have been removed). I explained in a few post replies that WP:NONFREE prohibits the use of non-free images like that, so saying I removed it and never bothered to comment or explain is inaccurate, disagreeing doesn't mean I didn't try to explain it. I believe I also stated it in the edit summary, which means that I provided at least some idea of why I removed it (I usually type: 'remove excessive non-free images; see WP:NFCC..' or something along those lines). I'm not beating a dead horse about that anymore. The point is there was no reason to state that even if I wasn't directed towards me, I was the only one posing opposition to you, so it implies what you meant. Being uncivil towards me doesn't get you far, as it only provokes me to respond the same. — Moe ε 05:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Live Adventures of Mike Bloomfield and Al Kooper

Hi there, FreeKee, I wonder if you can have a look at this for me & see if it can be taken out of stub; I'd put it on the WP:Albums Assessment page but it doesn't look as if anyone is picking these up just now. There is a backlog, all of my stuff. Cheers, --Rodhullandemu 01:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Nice work! -Freekee 03:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your very helpful comments. If I were experienced enough to give you Barnstars & stuff, I'd do it; as to your suggestion re:Trivia, hmmm. I've read WP:Trivia. It seems to me, having seen a number of pages with Trivia sections, that these are the last refuge of editors who do not know how to interpolate information otherwise- that's why I use refs as footnotes. Meanwhile, I'll take your comments on board. Happy editing!! --Rodhullandemu 03:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know what you mean about trivia. I hate trivia sections because they end up being a collecting point for useless crap like "you can hear this song playing the background of one scene in..." But trivia is allowed in WP, and even trivia sections if they're reasonable. In this case, I think most of the info you presented was reasonable to have in the article, so calling it that would not be the worst thing in the world. -Freekee 03:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just working on this before I finally get some zzz's (sheesh!- two pages done today); Not quite sure what you mean by "The other thing I would recommend is to remove most of the "introduction". Do you mean Bloomfield's opening speech or my analytical comments? I have emailed Al Kooper to get his comments on this page and if necessary, can get his consent for publication. Cheers --Rodhullandemu 03:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I meant the text for Track 1. Sorry. Be careful about who owns the copyright, though. It probably belongs to the publishing company. That might be Kooper, though. -Freekee 03:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright probably legally belongs to CBS/Columbia, since I don't think relationships between labels & performers in the late 60s would have foreseen a use such as this nearly forty years later. I'm prepared to defend it on a "fair use" basis since the actual text has been in the public domain, without demur, over that period. I'm not an expert on US copyright law, but if I get a reply from Al Kooper releasing what is essentially his production, I would be content with that. I'm not sure I would want to get into an argument with the Estate of Bloomfield, if it still exists, but my inclination is to follow the advice of the Duke of Wellington: "Publish & be Damned!". I'll leave it as it is, and if some Bot picks it up, OK. This is not something that is going to bring WP to its knees. "Time for Bed", said Zebedee --Rodhullandemu 03:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For you good work and contributions to Wisconsin articles and bands! :) LightHouseEffect (talk) 21:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus for deletion?

There didn't seem to be a consensus for deletion at CfD:Album articles without cover art. Would you mind explaining your decision? -Freekee (talk) 17:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See: User_talk:Jogers#Category:Album_articles_without_cover_art. - jc37 22:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Freelove '69

The song was released as a single by Hoodoo Gurus off the band's 1991 album, Kinky. The single reached No. 3 on the Billboard Modern Rock Tracks chart in that year - check the article on the album or the discograhy listing. An opportunity exists to create a separate article on the single & I'll put it on my to-do list.Dan arndt (talk) 03:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Many thanks for your comments about the proposed merger of the Janesville, Madison articles-town&city.Thank you-RFD (talk) 00:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to My Party

Fair enough. Happy holidays! --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 04:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jumpinjive.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jumpinjive.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I messed with this. Feel free to revert it. Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem. -Freekee (talk) 02:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grafton image

Nice image of downtown Grafton and the park! I went to a wedding there once for one of my then co-workers back when I lived in Sheboygan, and your image reminds me of the moment. Thanks! Royalbroil 01:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bands

I did what was requested on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Bands. You were involved in that discussion, so what do you think? --Qsaw (talk) 17:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MUSIC proposal

As someone who has previously been involved in WP:MUSIC policy discussion. I would much appreciate your input on this proposal if possible. --neonwhite user page talk 02:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for your comments

As someone previously involved in a discussion re this issue, I would appreciate your comments at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums#Release_dates_listed_pre-release. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 14:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wadham's Oil and Grease Company of Milwaukee

You asked me to comment about the article's potential at DYK. Length is kind of short but long enough (around 1760 found, 1500 minimum). A DYK can't be a stub, so I removed the stub markers. It meets the date criteria. The DYK needs to be cited with an inline citation, so be careful. I read through the references, and they each reference way more than the one sentence that they are attached to. I recommend that you add them to multiple lines. I provided you with a sample of how to use several inline citations from one source. Let me know if you need more help. The picture is striking and should be recommended if you decide to list the article.

The first thing that caught my eye was: "How is this notable?" There were hundreds of gas stations brands at that time. I dug around and found 2 things that weren't noted: the brand eventually became part of Mobil Oil which makes it notable, and at least one station became a registered historic place (RHP) which is notable. I would create a section for RHP station(s), then add the article to Category:Registered Historic Places in Wisconsin. See Herman C. Timm House for the various templates related to RHP in Wisconsin. Let me know if you need help with anything. You have 5 days from creation to list it. Royalbroil 12:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, RB. You confirmed some of the things I was thinking, including the picture. The thing I would most like to DYK is the fact that the stations were among the earliest examples of branding by architecture. The quote in the article that is relevant is This notion of architecture as packaging was novel at the time Eschweiler created the Wadhams pagoda, but spread rapidly through gas station retailing and into the broader vocabulary of roadside design. I hope that's a good enough citation. I'll update the article for the RHP. Thanks! -Freekee (talk) 04:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should nominate it for DYK. It's a great hook if you word it right. Make sure that it's listed under the right date (April 21). Definitely nominate the picture too - it's excellent. My pictures don't usually get used, so don't be offended if it's not used.
I rarely get to your area anymore. I moved from Sheboygan and my sister moved away from Port. I do have a picture request. I'd like a closeup detail picture of the SAFER barrier at the Milwaukee Mile if you go to State Fair Park. I suppose you'd have to have access to the track, so you probably couldn't honor my request. I took this picture looking through a chainlink fence that's not visible on the picture. I wish I could have gotten closer to look down to show the honeycomb pattern of the SAFER barrier. Maybe I'll make it to a race at the Mile this year. Did you know that there was a local track at Cedarburg that was very important to former NASCAR champion Alan Kulwicki's early career? Royalbroil 05:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kulwicki's gravestone

Check out the image at flickr for a detailed map: http://www.flickr.com/photos/royal_broil/2157750157/ . On the lower right, click on (map) after Taken in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Then zoom in to the extreme detail. It's located at the last gravestone in that section of the cemetery. You can see the road behind the gravestone. It's a family gravestone. He's buried next to his mother and brother. I wonder if his father Gerry got buried there, too, to complete the last of the Kulwicki's. You can find a map of the cemetery at findagrave.com [2]. Kulwicki is located at the extreme left side of Section 15. There's also congressmen Klezka's grave nearby in section 12 or 13, baseball hall of famer Al Simmon's beautiful huge gravestone in section 14 or 17, and congressman Zablocki has a beautiful statue in section 15 (I think). These other people are buried in that general area. Royalbroil 03:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, you got the right image. His grave is the one in the center where there are 2 small bushes close together with the gravestone between them. Just on the other side of the road near those trees is where Congressman Klezka is buried. I don't remember seeing that other gravestone that you took, but I have the water tower in the background of some of my pictures of Al Simmon's grave. Royalbroil 02:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

4/26 DYK

Updated DYK query On 26 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wadham's Oil and Grease Company of Milwaukee, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford 23:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin Historical Markers

Where did you find out that the Wisconsin historical markers are copyrighted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redwoodperch (talk • contribs) 02:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sun Prairie roads

Yep, at least one of the featured articles that I noted a s guideline presents the info as I did (Ann Arbor). Looking at some other articles, I c an see clearly that it can be cleaned up into prose. I guess that will be the next task. I invite you to lend a hand. :) - Hexhand (talk) 02:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assure you, there is no thunder to be stolen; its Wikipedia - the best we can hope for is a few barnstars and to get along with others. As well, I wasn't aiming to "pad" the article; I intend to make the article concise, but full. I look at articles like statues: I first gather together all the stone, and finally trim away everything that isn't the subject. I prefer to have more material to work with. All the extra info also encourages other sto come in and either correct, add to or summarize what's already there. - Hexhand (talk) 16:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, there are other FA articles that don't use the same format that Ann Arbor does. I can try to convert it to text instead, but the FA articles tend to be less helpful at that point, since the ones that use prose are distinct. Erie PA, Youngstown OH and Seattle WA are all large-scale cities, and Dawson Creek, BC is notable for its roads alone. I am willing to tough it out, though. I don't own the article, and I welcome assistance in improving it. :) - Hexhand (talk) 03:06, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of HushPuppies

A tag has been placed on HushPuppies requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Closeapple (talk) 13:28, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Ron Wood albums

I have nominated Category:Ron Wood albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Ronnie Wood albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 11:43, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflict?

I was going to come here and thank you for your efforts in continuing the discussion, and making sure my fears (that the discussion would end and the guidelines cease to evolve) were unfounded. But then I noticed that you stopped participating. This doesn't seem like a coincidence. This was at the same time that I admitted that I was a bit upset. (Maybe I shouldn't have said that you "correctly detected the harshness of my original statement." I don't really know how harsh you thought I was being.) Would it help if I told you that I was over it? I stated my unhappiness with your actions, and you defended yourself over those actions. I made one last defense of my statement (hoping that it wouldn't be taken as trying to get the last word in), and we continued to hone the guidelines. That all seemed reasonable to me. But... I'm a consensus builder, but I should have recognized your preference for bold action, and tempered my response. -Freekee (talk) 00:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't stopped participating. You seemed to think I was taking too much control, so I stepped back to let others make the next proposal. I already responded to what has been said so far, and when there is more discussion I will respond to that. You complained that I acted too fast, but now, if you think things are moving too slow, you know how I felt! Anyway, there is a big difference between suggestions like "maybe we should say something along the lines of..." vs. "here is an exact proposed wording...", and when I see the latter, I will support it if I agree with it. The page is always on my watchlist. Even if I were to drop out (frequently I'm away from WP for a week at a time), that doesn't mean the guideline must cease to evolve. You or anyone else can keep it going, and implement further changes. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 08:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New straw poll

You are a user who responded to RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — talk 23:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dio

AB Trio

hey there. I actually have a lot of great pics of the trio - mostly from my touring w. them in Mexico. I'm actually not sure how to upload them though.. can you give me a hand? thanks, Biff Bifftar (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you

Hi.

A really apreciate the Star you give me, but i can`t take more than half the credit, Maen. K. A. was the designer of the star and template, and only because you and Moonriddengirl support it that became a reality.

Thank you. Zidane tribal (talk) 01:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photos of FLW buildings in Milwaukee

Nice shots of the Frederick C. Bogk House and the Albert and Edith Adelman House. By any chance do you have any photos of the Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church or the Arthur L. Richards homes (American System-Built Houses) on 2714 & 2720-2732 West Burnham Boulevard? --Waltloc (talk) 14:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't believe there were no pics of the Annunciation Church. I've uploaded all the pics I have, at the moment, but plan to go out again if the weather is decent. That one's at the top of my list, and I'll see what I can do about the other. There's a long list of pics that need taking. It's like a scavenger hunt. :-) -Freekee (talk) 17:53, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More nice shots, Thank you! --Waltloc (talk) 20:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Link?

The National Trust link on your FLW article is not productive. It looks like the trouble is on the Nationaltrust's end.

^ a b c "Fire Guts Rare FLW House in Indiana". National Trust. 2006. http://www.nationaltrust.org/Magazine/archives/arc_news_2006/011706.htm. Retrieved on 2008-02-22.

Lgalbi (talk) 15:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Lgalbi[reply]

Thanks for the notice. I'll check it out. Or have the guy who added them (posted just above you here) check them out. He added almost all the external links and much of the second half of the article. -Freekee (talk) 15:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CSN (box set)

Hi.

You rated this article a Start, it doesn`t have track lengths, and the members who are mentioned are production members not performers, i had in mind to work on this article last for the letter C. This is the kind of thing that worries me, we need a consensus, to me this article is not, definitely not, an Start. I hope you don`t mind me placing this on the project talk page as a pretty good example. Zidane tribal (talk) 05:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, i had not read your mention on this on the project talk page, but as i said above, i HAD in mind to add the personnel section and track lenghts because Allmusic mention them. i think guidelines are pretty soft. Zidane tribal (talk) 05:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zidane tribal (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

For reaching a happy ending on the assessement matter. Zidane tribal (talk) 07:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure i`m happy, i already started working on the stubs, which BTW already are like 800 less than when the talk began, the most important thing is consensus and it was reached, with that we can all work in synchrony. Zidane tribal (talk) 05:42, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe i should wait for you to bring the issue, but, fefine "proper areas" Zidane tribal (talk) 19:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for American System-Built Homes

Updated DYK query On May 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article American System-Built Homes, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

∗ \ / (⁂) 21:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Villa Terrace.jpg

Thanks for helping with image maintenance. I notice that you added the disputed fair use rationale template to this page, but this image is marked as free use. If you feel that an image which is tagged as free is actually not free, you should list it at WP:PUI. Stifle (talk) 11:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you left me a message regarding File:Villa Terrace.jpg. I had tagged it "disputed non-free", and you informed me I should have posted it at WP:PUI. thanks for the info. Now I see you've tagged the image with a "di-no permission". Does this mean I don't need to post it there? Or should I go ahead and post it anyway? It looks to me like a pretty blatant theft. -Freekee (talk) 02:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The "no permission" is an alternative to PUI, and I should have told you that as well as that there was nothing more for you to do on this image. Sorry for the confusion. Stifle (talk) 08:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prod to AfD on The Same Parents

I've removed the prod and nominated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Same Parents for deletion to resolve the notability issue the original poster brought up. Shadowjams (talk) 17:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Hi. I notice you copied a bunch of my images to Commons. At least I think that's what happened. I'm having a little trouble understanding how this works. The ones you did, a template says, "This file is now available on Wikimedia Commons as File:William Van Altena House May09.jpg." And I can still edit the image page, and it still has the Wikipedia categories, and such. But some others, that were done some time ago say "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. The description on its description page there is shown below." And I can't edit them or categorize. Can you explain this to me, or direct me to some resource regarding the "Commonizing" of images? I'd appreciate it. -Freekee (talk) 19:08, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Freekee. First of all, thanks for photographing all those sites and uploading them. I want to go to work on Madison sites in the same sort of way. As for Commons, you probably already know some or most (or all) of what appears at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_commons>, which kind of explains the rationale for moving images from English-language Wikipedia to Commons. I'm not at all sure why you can't edit or categorize certain images that are now on Wikimedia Commons. Can you give me an example of one to take a look at? Jdsteakley (talk) 04:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See File:Cedarburg-mill-pagoda.jpg. Notice there are no edit links. This was uploaded to WP, and then moved to Commons. -Freekee (talk) 04:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, nevermind. I just checked my watchlist. After you moved the images to Commons, another user deleted the ones from WP. Okay, so what are the criteria for moving images there? Any free image? Should I be uploading them there in the first place? -Freekee (talk) 04:46, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I think that generally it's better to upload images to Commons rather than to English Wikipedia. And if you've got the time and interest, it helps to transfer other peoples' images from English Wikipedia to Commons. (I initially got on to this because I've been a lot more involved with German Wikipedia than English Wikipedia since first becoming a Wikipedian last November.) Without looking back at the files of yours that have been deleted, I'm guessing it might have been Royalbroil who did it, since he's an admin who can make such deletions. Yesterday he gave me a Commons barnstar for moving files to Commons. Quite a number of them were his images. Jdsteakley (talk) 12:57, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm acquainted with Royalbroil, and I think he's done some of mine in the past, but the latest ones were done by Luk and by Athaenara. The only issue I have with having images there instead of here is that the categorization is removed from here. Shouldn't there be a mention on the upload page, something like, "if your image is suitable for Wikimedia Commons, please consider uploading it there", at the very least? You guys are doing a lot of work moving all these images over. I've been editing here for several years, and still didn't know the deal on the Commons. -Freekee (talk) 16:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can you tell me more precisely what sort of categorization is removed when an image gets moved to Commons, or point me to an example? And what you propose, a mention of Commons on the upload page, does exist. When you are on an English Wikipedia page and click on "upload" over on the left, you get this page: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Upload>. It specifically suggests that you instead upload the image at Commons. Jdsteakley (talk) 19:28, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It just changes from WP/EN categorization to Commons cats. Not a big deal, I guess. That's not the page I get when I click "Upload file" on the menu bar. I get http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload. I wonder why you get a different page. Is that an issue with skins? So I was looking at the page you linked. It took me a minute to realize that you're supposed to click on the image type that you want to upload, and it will take you to a specialized upload page. Interesting. And I see that there's a huge banner about the Commons on the free image upload page. -Freekee (talk) 20:20, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image?

I notice you added File:Benjamin Church House.jpg, to the NHRP list, but it doesn't seem to be showing. -Freekee (talk) 03:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm . . . not quite sure what the problem might be. I can see the image okay. I do notice that sometimes images fail to show up even in regular articles, and then if you click on reload (once or twice or three times!), they finally come up. I just figured this was some kind of minor system problem. Btw, I'm not very happy with the photo of the Benjamin Church House, since it's an old black and white photo from many years ago. Would you be interested in making a new photo of it? I also added crummy old black and white images of Immanuel Presbyterian and the Old Soldiers Home. Would you want to photograph them? -- And now I'd like to get back to something you asked earlier about the pictures moved to Commons. You remarked that some of your pictures that were moved a while ago by others had now been deleted in English Wikipedia, so that they exist only in Commons. I think that's what admins are supposed to do, just to prevent the redundancy and save storage space on the server. But you went on to remark that you could not edit your pictures on Commons, because there's no edit tab at the top of the page, and as an example you pointed me to your Cedarburg pagoda. Well, you can get to an edit tab. You just have to click on the blue link within the sentence: "The description on its description page there is shown below." (The words "description page" are the blue link.) The new page that comes up has all the edit tabs etc. at the top. Jdsteakley (talk) 14:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, Estabrook Park! I was using Geohack to locate sites for my last photo hunt, and the location it gave me for the Church House didn't make sense, so I skipped it (I did the entire rest of the north shore that day). If I'd just read the article, I could have figured that one out. I should be able to get that one within the next week. Funny you should mention the Old Soldiers Home. The first time I went out looking for pics, I took all the remaining Historic Landmarks in Milwaukee (got five, couldn't find the sixth). On that day, I was at the VA center, and took a pic of the building, but I didn't know if was on the list, so I didn't shoot a pic suitable for WP.
The Church House pic still isn't showing for me. Maybe I have to clear my cache or something. Funny, it does show up for me here, though the article showed a different image at that time. It was another one of Sulfur's deleted pics with the same name as the current file.
As for the images, when I said there were no edit links, I was talking about WP/EN. But I've since discovered how that all works. When some WP/EN image pages had links, and some didn't, even though they were all on Commons, that was because the WP images hadn't been deleted yet. And I've also discovered how to make categories just for WP/EN on the Commons images. So it's all good, I guess. But I'm still curious why you have a different upload page than I do. -Freekee (talk) 04:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I got the pic. -Freekee (talk) 15:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nice picture!Jdsteakley (talk) 16:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Independence Day on DYK

You might like to comment on the more recent version of this thread (or just move your previous comment to it) at WT:DYK#Consensus check. Best, rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 17:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Freekee. You have new messages at Dabomb87's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dabomb87 (talk) 13:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/separation of different versions of same song

As somebody who appears to be interested in song articles you might be interested to know there is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions with the purpose of trying to establish a standard rule for merge/separation of different versions of the same song. You are invited to comment. Regards,--Richhoncho (talk) 08:26, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okee, Wisconsin

Do you have any photos of Okee, Wisconsin-the eastern terminal of the Merrimac Ferry in Columbia County? Many thanks-RFD (talk) 00:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your comment about Okee, Wisconsin. Speaking for myself-I have started articles about various members of the Wisconsin Legislature who started communities, etc. and ended up in the legislature-the 19th century; I am not into politics or political science so none of the current legislators have articles done so far.RFD (talk) 11:50, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your edit on RFD's talk page. The other big news is that User:BaronLarf is back editing! BaronLarf started WikiProject Wisconsin and is an admin. Royalbroil 03:09, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo request

Would you sometime get a picture of the Mequon Town Hall and Fire Station Complex, and other miscellaneous pictures of the community? I am looking through the Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Wisconsin, which is pretty much useless since no one uses it. I've taken out many photo requests which were fulfilled a long time ago. Royalbroil 14:41, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'm looking forward - you take great photos! Royalbroil 15:14, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, I haven't looked at that category for many months. I agree that a winter picture of the river is usually not very helpful. I have 130 pictures queued up to upload, so I'll be keeping busy. I'd guess that I uploaded over 100 pictures in the past few months, many from my trip to LaCrosse and other cities on the Mississippi River. A few weeks ago, I came to southern Sheboygan County to get pictures of the remaining registered items in the county. I was disappointed to not be able to find either place in Elkhart Lake. I drove all of the roads in the area. I'm guessing that the addressing system changed since they were added to the Register. It took so long that I wasn't able to head northeast to Sheboygan. I ended up photographing Adell and Random Lake before it got too dark. Royalbroil 19:03, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anon editor

An anon editor made the change with no reason given for it. Therefore, I thought it was vandalism. Thank you-RFD (talk) 13:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

King vs. Chain O' Lakes-King

I'd love to get your opinion on this issue at Talk:Chain O' Lakes-King, Wisconsin. Cheers, --BaronLarf 05:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Freekee! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 8 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Warren Wiegratz - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 13:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great images!

I've really appreciated the quality images that you have uploaded this year! They look great - your photographic experience with obvious with great angles, working with light correctly, and you obviously have a quality camera. I fondly remember a bunch of locales from my travels before my Wiki-days. Royalbroil 12:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Albums by artist categorization

Hi there Freekee, you recently took part of a discussion at WT:ALBUMS regarding the Albums by artist categorization. I would like you invite you to further comment on the subsection Albums by genre and nationality, as no one has contributed to the discussion lately. I would really appreciate comments, as I would like to get this proposal off the ground. Regards. — ξxplicit 19:23, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Photo credit

Hi, the City of Phoenix, Arizona is preparing a publication on commercial architecture during the World War II era. We are looking at buildings all over the country and would like use the photo of the Wadhams Gas Station in West Allis, WI in our publication. It appears to be in the public domain, but can you tell us to whom the photo should be credited? Our e-mail address is historic@phoenix.gov. Thanks! - Kevin Weight, Planner III, City of Phoenix Historic Preservation Office, 200 W Washington St, 17th Floor, Phoenix AZ 85003. website: phoenix.gov/historic. 148.167.2.10 (talk) 01:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Split Milwaukee NRHPs? Been Bold

I noticed your photographic work on the List of Milwaukee County NRHPs. Please keep up the good work, and when you are finished, please post the results at the Fully Illustrated lists section at WP:NRHP

I also noticed that you suggest splitting the county sites off of the city sites. I've done some of this type of thing before (e.g. in Chicago) and thought I'd see how far I could get. See User:Smallbones/Milwaukee nrhps for the Milwaukee city list, renumbered up to 60 - I hate renumbering, so there are about 100 to go!

What you'd need to do now, if you want to continue, is finish the renumbering, and maybe put in neighborhoods in place of all the "Milwaukees", then create the article with a copy of the sandbox. At the old county list put in a notice that the city list is at the new page. Then give me a note and I'll strip out all the city entries from the county list. I might even be able to renumber them all! At that point double checking the numbers, and rewriting the intros is all that's needed. Smallbones (talk) 20:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I've made the basic split in article space, but it never hurts for another set of eyes to recheck. Also, you might want to rewrite the introductions and put neighborhoods in for all the "Milwaukees" in the city list. Smallbones (talk) 05:01, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this. I hope to do something with this in the next few days, when I find the time. I probably won't put the neighborhoods in, though, since that's sometimes hard to find, and sometimes meaningless (like, newish names). -Freekee (talk) 05:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, nice user box! Feel free to copy the code and put in your own picture, if you'd like.
The introductions are pretty basic now, but there is nothing terribly wrong with them. Still, more complete introductions by somebody who knows the area would benefit the article greatly. After checking the article Milwaukee neighborhoods I see what you mean about neighborhoods. Still, even a simple East Side, West, Side, North Side, South Side, Downtown label would benefit readers. There's a couple of external links in that article that may help.

Smallbones (talk) 16:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting map of neighborhoods. I recognize many names, but in some cases, they don't even match the signage in those areas. :-) It seems like a good idea to put names on the list, though. I hope to find names that make sense for everything. Thanks for the tip on the NHRP project and their lists of lists and articles. I had originally hoped to get this list to Featured status, but there are so many properties that have absolutely no info on, that I can't even write one-sentence descriptions on them. I just noticed there are only 22 sites left to photograph in the city, and sixteen in the rest of the county. I might get it done this year! (Except for the two that no longer exist.) Thanks again! -Freekee (talk) 19:27, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For featured lists, you don't need to have all the photos, and there can be some (10%?) redlinks. They seem to concentrate more on the text. As far as the destroyed sites, you might get historical photos or drawings, or, as is quite common for these lists, just photograph where they were. Smallbones (talk) 19:53, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox looks good! Smallbones (talk) 04:02, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion concerning foreign language album titles

There is a discussion going on concerning a guideline that you were originally involved back in 2008 when it was established. You are kindly invited to comment over at WT:ALBUM#Capitalization of foreign-name albums and songs. – IbLeo(talk) 22:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oneida Street Station

Hi-The Oneida Street Station article is excellent-well written and research. I review an article on an Australian plant life on DYK on befalf of yourself and the article. I hope this will be helpful. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 11:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Oneida Street Station

The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for your kindness with the DYK. I wanted to help you out especially with reviewing the various DYK nominations. Thank you again-RFD (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rave/Eagles club

Hi Freekee, I noticed that you mentioned something (back in 2009) on the talk page for The Rave that there should be a history section and I agree. The first time that I saw a concert there (Siouxsie and the Banshees) it was called the "Central Park Ballroom" [3], however I can't find any RS to justify adding that info to the article. The National Register of Historic Places has it listed as "Eagles Club" [4] Robman94 (talk) 14:31, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP Albums in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Albums for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 00:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on linking to streamed copies of albums

Wikipedia policy allows us to link to legal streamed copies of albums. It would be useful to draw up a guideline on how and when to link to such albums; however, there is concern that it may not be appropriate as the music would not be available in all parts of the world. Is the benefit of having access to the music for most users outweighed by the fact that some users will follow a link to find the music is not playable in their region? Your view would be helpful at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums. SilkTork ✔Tea time 02:15, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re "light" vs. "light station"

By long-established convention we have listed USA lighthouses under "X Light" rather than "X Light Station" as this is how the Coast Guard names them. You are however welcome to add a redirect from the "light station" name. And please, be my guest: work on lighthouses has flagged in recent years and there are many more to write! Thank you for your interest. Mangoe (talk) 14:56, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photographer's Barnstar

The Photographer's Barnstar
For you excellence in photographing sites on the National Register of Historic Places in southeast Wisconsin. I hereby award you the Photographer's Barnstar. I was in the Milwaukee area recently and found that you have photographed almost all of the sites in the city. Also you have an excellent photograph of the Greendale Historic District which I added to its new listing as a National Historic Landmark. Also nice job with producing a photograph the stable at the Lohman Funeral Home and Livery Stable which is being razed now. Incredible combination! Royalbroil 17:43, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot, RB!
You're welcome and thanks for the barnstar back! I'm at well over 3000 of my own photographs to Commons. Only a few hundred (tops) were taken outside of Wisconsin. I get most when I'm vacationing or traveling to race tracks around Wisconsin - so most are in the eastern half. Lately most have been small unincorporated communities or in cities/villages that I haven't visited for 5+ years. I have over 200 photographs to upload this fall / winter from my trip to Ashland -- and I'm still not done identifying what I all took on the final day on the way back. I haven't been south of Milwaukee so that area is probably poorly photographed. I did photograph most of the bigger communities north of Port Washington.
You saw that I got a few photographs in the city of Milwaukee that were within walking distance of where I was at. I saw the city is about 95% done so I added it to the list of those over 90% (diff). With 168 sites, it would be toward the top of the list once completed. I'm glad to see that you enjoy photographing NRHP so much too! We complement each other's area well along and User:Jeff the quiet has photographed much of the north central part of the state. Despite not saying much, Jeff's work speaks for him! Royalbroil 19:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I automatically shoot photos of any town that I haven't visited for a few years then later I check to see if there are photos here. I have 4 photos of Minocqua - the welcome sign the DOT sign, a shot of a narrow isthmus between lakes, and the fourth is a pretty shot of the Hwy 51 sign when entering downtown. About Milwaukee County NRHP, I don't have any from the rest of the county. I agree that the city definitely belongs split out of the county article. You don't count the delisted or address restricted sites for completeness of the NRHP lists. So 58 / 63 = 92.0% complete. Royalbroil 02:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're right about me generally doing illustrative not artists shots. Many of my shots are through the passenger side-windshield or side window while moving. I do the best that I can but it leads to harsh light sometimes looking into the sun. I do the best that I can to clean them up a home but I have only fair photo editing skills. It has developed from repetition but has prevented me from getting any featured photos. I have just proposed this image for my first Quality Image on Commons since I thought it was good enough straight out of the camera. Some just commented that it needs vertical perspective adjustment so that is sinking my ship. I look at the building lines with rectangles and see that they are barely imperfect. Most lines on the building are imprecise - obscured by vines. I went to Thunder Bay once too and it was a great trip! Royalbroil 12:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pic requests

Do you ever go to the Cedarburg area? Could you take a photo of the Cedarburg Bog? Also, Lizard Mound County Park is nearby. I saw those mounds once and I was VERY impressed. Royalbroil 03:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem at all! -Freekee (talk) 19:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks GREAT! Thank you. I didn't noticed that ee needed photographs of poison sumac - I would have taken some. I'll try to photograph it this fall when the sumac plants are brilliant red! Royalbroil 23:42, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relax duplicate linking rule (again!)

Hi Freekee,

You might be interested to see that I'm reopening the issue of duplicate links at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Linking#Relax_duplicate_linking_rule. --Slashme (talk) 21:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Freekee. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Freekee. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Photographer's Barnstar
For getting one of your pictures published in a book! Dolotta (talk) 18:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scheherazade

Hello! I have a question about your old edit, the statement about "six-note motif that alludes to that work", with the reference to Tales Of 1001 Nights, Volume I liner notes. Do you still have this compilation? If yes, could you please make a picture of this fragment? I'd like to see what is stated there exactly. --Yms (talk) 05:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Freekee. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Robert Burns memorials, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Garfield Park (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:43, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Statue of Robert Burns (Milwaukee)

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Cemetary (band) albums

A tag has been placed on Category:Cemetary (band) albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:06, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 

Index: pl ar de en es fr it arz nl ja pt ceb sv uk vi war zh ru af ast az bg zh-min-nan bn be ca cs cy da et el eo eu fa gl ko hi hr id he ka la lv lt hu mk ms min no nn ce uz kk ro simple sk sl sr sh fi ta tt th tg azb tr ur zh-yue hy my ace als am an hyw ban bjn map-bms ba be-tarask bcl bpy bar bs br cv nv eml hif fo fy ga gd gu hak ha hsb io ig ilo ia ie os is jv kn ht ku ckb ky mrj lb lij li lmo mai mg ml zh-classical mr xmf mzn cdo mn nap new ne frr oc mhr or as pa pnb ps pms nds crh qu sa sah sco sq scn si sd szl su sw tl shn te bug vec vo wa wuu yi yo diq bat-smg zu lad kbd ang smn ab roa-rup frp arc gn av ay bh bi bo bxr cbk-zam co za dag ary se pdc dv dsb myv ext fur gv gag inh ki glk gan guw xal haw rw kbp pam csb kw km kv koi kg gom ks gcr lo lbe ltg lez nia ln jbo lg mt mi tw mwl mdf mnw nqo fj nah na nds-nl nrm nov om pi pag pap pfl pcd krc kaa ksh rm rue sm sat sc trv stq nso sn cu so srn kab roa-tara tet tpi to chr tum tk tyv udm ug vep fiu-vro vls wo xh zea ty ak bm ch ny ee ff got iu ik kl mad cr pih ami pwn pnt dz rmy rn sg st tn ss ti din chy ts kcg ve
Prefix: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia

Portal : Agama
Agama
Portal : Bahasa
Bahasa
Portal : Biografi
Biografi
Portal : Budaya
Budaya
Portal : Ekonomi
Ekonomi
Portal : Elektronika
Elektronika
Portal : Film
Film
Portal : Filsafat
Filsafat
Portal : Geografi
Geografi
Portal : Indonesia
Indonesia
Portal : Ilmu
Ilmu
Portal : Lingkungan
Lingkungan
Portal : Masyarakat
Masyarakat
Portal : Matematika
Matematika
Portal : Militer
Militer
Portal : Mitologi
Mitologi
Portal : Musik
Musik
Portal : Olahraga
Olahraga
Portal : Pendidikan
Pendidikan
Portal : Politik
Politik
Portal : Sastra
Sastra
Portal : Sejarah
Sejarah
Portal : Seni
Seni
Portal : Teknologi
Teknologi