Hey man, hows it going? Its been a while since I've actively edited, but when I logged on today and checked my watchlist I was greeted with a nice surprise. April 16, Federal Bridge Gross Weight Formula is going to be featured on the main page! Good thing I've been keeping an eye on it, making sure the links weren't going dead and whatnot. But enough about me, how do you like being an admin? --ErgoSum•talk•trib02:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
CONGRATS!!! I'll watch for it. You've really increased the presence of the trucking related articles on Wikipedia. You've made your mark on the world. =-)
I just reached a minor milestone myself, my first successful GA nomination for a non-roads article. The article is Thistle, Utah, it's about another of my hobbies, ghost towns. Although, I'm sure it shines through that the author was a road-geek.=-) I'm trying to decide if I dare take it to FAC; I'm not 100% convinced it's ready.
I have found admin work to be absolutely monotonous. They say Admin is like being a janitor; I think babysitter is more the truth. For the most part I've gone back to article work, and just do admin work when I'm too bored/lazy/tired to do article work. A while back on the IRC channel, a distress signal came out for any uninvolved admin to look at a situation, as all admins who knew about it were too involved to intervene. I guess I inhaled too many paint fumes from my home remodeling project, because I volunteered. It sucked to try to sort out who did what while it was still going on, and spiraling more out of control by the second. I issued my royal decree and just hoped I was doing the right thing. It sucked; I'm sure I'll catch hell over it for being an authoritarian jerk sooner-or-later. Why do you ask? Wanna' join the ranks? =-) Dave (talk) 03:54, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ewww, no thanks! I have enough problems of my own, without trying to babysit others. One of the reasons I stopped actively contributing was the politics and drama of it all, although I must say my other hobbies have become more interesting to me lately, which is the main reason I stopped. I've recently taken up gardening! One of the few pastimes that I have never tried, I must say I thoroughly enjoy it. I get to play in the dirt, enjoy the fresh spring air, and there is nothing more satisfying than watching your seeds grow and develop into mature plants. Although I wouldn't recommend it if you're into the whole instant gratification thing. --ErgoSum•talk•trib00:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject U.S. Roads in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject U.S. Roads for a Signpost article to be published in early May. 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. Feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some advice is needed
Hey Dave hows it going? I don't know if you can help or not, but recently someone from the American Trucking Associations has started editing the ATA article. I know this is a conflict of interest, no question about that, but some of their edits consist of material copied and pasted from the ATA website. Are they allowed to give permission to do this? They seem to be well-intentioned and I have left a few messages on the contributor's talk page (User talk:TruckingMatters) and they seem willing to follow the rules. I just thought you could lend your two cents if you have some time. Thanks. --ErgoSum•talk•trib01:46, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey ErgoSum, how's life? I'm not too concerned about an ATA employee editing an article about the ATA. Conflict of Interest, yes, but that can be managed. However, the bigger issue is the Terms of use on the ATA's website at: [1] which specifically prohibits electronic republishing of their work. So, whomever did this needs to publicly state that they are in a position of authority within the ATA to license the text put on Wikipedia under the Creative Commons license, even with the above terms of use on truckline.com. Dave (talk) 02:15, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thats all I wanted to know. I wasn't sure how the whole COI thing was handled, but I knew the copyright issue would be a problem. I had never heard of the OTRS thing so thanks for explaining that, now I know. Happy editing! --ErgoSum•talk•trib19:26, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Utah audit
Would you be interested in going through the Utah articles and performing an assessment audit (making sure that all article assessments are correct?) Scott and I both tried and failed at doing so because we're not quite sure when an article is complete enough for B-Class since we're not familiar with the roads. --Rschen775406:34, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For the next few days my wikipedia time will be forcibly sporadic. And to be honest, I have higher priorities with what to do with my limited wikipedia time than reviewing rankings, (namely put the finishing touches on Thistle, Utah before nominating for FA and catching up on some long promised reviews of other articles for people). With that said, Utah is one of the easiest states to rank, as UDOT provides official sources for the route description on all state routes, and history on most. I'd check for sources to those section. route description: [2] History: [3] Good Luck! Dave (talk) 03:29, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Utah State Parks
Hi Dave,
I'm totally new to Wikipedia (like, this week) so I'm learning lots as I go. I couldn't figure out how to respond to your other posts that you left me, so I'm probably doing this the hard way.
I got your note about how to upload the Utah State Parks logo; I'll do that. Thanks.
Also, with regard to Utah State Parks website content and copyrights (there are several in question), it has always been my understanding that, as a government agency, everything we produce is public domain (this includes websites, brochures, emails, accounting, salaries, performance evaluations, etc). There are literally hundreds of websites that poach information directly from our website. This has always been okay with us. I'm unsure why utah.gov has a copyright, this seems wrong to me. I'm checking into this though.
Furthermore, I helped write most of the text on our website; so I find it kind of interesting and amusing that I'm being flagged for using text that I wrote.
Anyway, I appreciate your help!
Brad Adkins
Utah State Parks
(we'll see if this signature thing works for me) Bradadkins274 (talk) 22:41, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I hope you understand that the barrage of "copyright infringement" stuff left on your talk page comes from a desire to avoid more problems than we already have. It is not an attempt to accuse you of any wrongdoing. I know your intentions are good. FYI, Federal government created content is public domain by law; however, that is not necessarily true of state government created content. The policy varies from state to state. I was going off the terms of use at utah.gov. However, if you are aware of a more binding policy or law for the state of Utah's copyright policy, please advise, as I have other articles I'm working on that could use this, including some photos of Thistle I'd like to use. Dave (talk) 22:49, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Utah State Parks and copyright issues
Hello,
Here is what I've learned about utah.gov and copyrights.
As it was explained to me, utah.gov has that copyright because there are a few agencies (state prison for example) that need to have their information copyrighted; and since utah.gov is the portal to all state agencies, they had to include the copyright. Agencies, such as Utah State Parks, are given the choice to remove the copyright from their own website, which we have done.
Notice, when you visit http://stateparks.utah.gov , that there is no copyright; this is public domain.
This should settle the whole copyright matter.
Thanks!
Brad Adkins
Utah State Parks
Bradadkins274 (talk) 17:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, this is the first time I've had internet access since my last message to you. It looks like things are working out. Thanks for going the extra mile on the permissions stuff. I will be without regular internet access for the next few days. However, if you still need assistance then, please let me know. Dave (talk) 21:57, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
reinstating Utah State Parks park listings
Also, could you help me by reinstating the many park listings that VernoWhitney removed?
He cited the same copyright issues that you did, except that he didn't ask me about it, he just removed everything.
Thanks for your help!
Brad Adkins
Utah State Parks
Bradadkins274 (talk) 17:26, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Utah State Parks granted permission to use information
I just forwarded an email from the Utah State Parks Administrative office to permissions-commons AT wikimedia DOT org.
The email explicitly gives permission to use any/all information obtained on the Utah State Parks website (http://stateparks.utah.gov) for any/all Wikipedia uses.
Historical populations - The table stops at 1950. If it became a ghost town in the 80s where is the rest of it?
History/Railroads - What exactly is a "beanery"?
History/Aftermath/Railroad - July 4th of what year? I assume we're still talking about 1983 but at this point it has been a while since a year was mentioned.
Geology and climate - What exactly is a "paleovalley"?
I don't know if you want to add this to the U.S. Route 395 in California article or not, but I plan on adding it to the U.S. Route 8 article if I can find a good way to integrate it. The two highways are shown running concurrently through Hill Valley, CA in the movie Back To The Future. Tonight's project will be to rent the movie and find the time index for that screen capture. I don't know that we can upload and use the photo under fair use, but I'll ask someone. This isn't to say that every movie ever made that shows highway markers should be listed in our articles, but I think in this case, at least for US 8 there is a good case to include it. After all, the highway is primarily in Minnesota and Wisconsin, but it was shown in Southern California in the movie. Imzadi1979→20:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't plan to mention it. If US 395 played a part in the actual plot, I would. In this case, the highway shields are a prop in a movie set. They most likely intentionally coincide with actual highway designations for realism. Another example of this is in the movie Thelma & Louise. While the couple are unknowingly rushing towards the Grand Canyon, a planted Arizona State Route 64 shield is visible. The real AZ-64 leads to the Grand Canyon; however, this scene was actually shot in my usernamesake town of Moab. In the case of US-8 and Back to the Future, if I had to guess, I'd say the intent was to pay homage to Interstate 8 with that sign. However, in 1955 an interstate highway shield would be an anachronism. Dave (talk) 22:36, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thistle
I'm slowly but surely getting to this! I hope to be through it this weekend. It looks very interesting so far—this is the kind of thing I would pull over and look at if I passed it on the highway. A motorcycle trip may be in order. --Andy Walsh(talk)06:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I Appreciate the help. As for the motorcycle trip, well there isn't much left any more. It would be more interesting to a geologist than a ghost town hunter. I've been there many times and have vague memories of when it was a town, stopping with my family for a Coke or whatever. Only wish I had a picture of it, it was actually a quaint pretty little town back in the day. Dave (talk) 20:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User:Hike796
U questioned User:Good Ol’factory's block on User talk:Hike796,1 I do not agree. We had a harassment problem of a sockpuppet by categories creation, template msgs, incivility and no response on talk pages.2 Hike796 has a similar behaviour. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:40, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for contributions to the project, Great work and fantastic effort. Congratulations, and may you wear the Imperial Napoleonic crowns well. – SMasters (talk) 06:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry I didn't get to this sooner when you asked me to look over it again. I'm about half-way through reading it again, and rather than clutter up the FAC with minor issues I'll raise them with you here as I come across them.
"The maintenance crew did not think much of the situation, however, and repaired the track as needed." I don't think the phrase "didn't think much of" is appropriate here, as it implies that they disapproved of the situation. Does this really mean that they didn't consider the situation to be a serious one? MalleusFatuorum15:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Vroom, vroom... Thank you for all your hard work. May you wear the crowns well, and may the crown sign lead you on the highway to more outstanding articles. – SMasters (talk) 09:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you have a lovely holiday season. I have one request: At least once this season, completely ruin someone's attempt to piss you off. If someone cuts you off in traffic or shits on you at work, just smile and wave and tell them Happy Holidays. Maybe they'll be less of an asshole, even if it's just for the rest of the day. Andy Walsh(talk)20:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Andy you're welcome. Ergosum, please do consider coming back. We haven't had a trucking related article on the front page since you left. Coincidence? I think not. =-) Dave (talk) 19:45, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Of course its no coincidence! But I cringe at the thought of the ridiculous amounts of work necessary to even submit an article for FA review, much less getting it to pass. It seems I'm the only editor who is interested in trucking articles, and believe me, I've tried to recruit other editors to help me out, to no avail. If I had some help (preferably from someone with knowledge of the industry), then I would have no problem writing more articles. Not to mention the local library sucks... sigh. --ErgoSum•talk•trib00:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, my only regret is that I couldn't find any free licensed pre-landslide photos of the town that were worth uploading. Dave (talk) 05:25, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I can take a look. How much time do I have? I'm a little busy tonight, but should be able to find time this week. Also, I can give it a review about completeness, flow, technical details, etc. but I'm not the best person to ask about spelling and grammar. I'm a rather sloppy writer. Dave (talk) 05:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This week would be great, I leave next Monday and can have time over the weekend to edit out any issues. Anything in the article that you feel doesn't meet FA-criteria I assume. The technical stuff, completeness, flow, etc. sound good. Thanks again.--NortyNort(Holla)08:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I started a review last night. I'm about 1/2 way through the article. I'll upload my comments when done. In the interim, so far it's a very good article but the wording is quite wordy. I'll have some suggestions on how to trim the article a bit shortly. Dave (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After reading your post on WT:USRD, I got an idea. You should create a subpage somewhere, either at the task force or in your userspace. Then, when you get time, just write down a couple thoughts or ideas. Eventually, and with a little pruning here and there, there will be a list of stuff that you feel is important enough to cover. –Fredddie™22:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good idea. I will have a better idea of my time constraints in about two weeks. If you don't mind, I'd like to put this off until then. However, I won't forget it. Dave (talk) 17:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Pong. Wow, nice to see this is finally being taken seriously. Any specific issue you would like me to respond? or just to keep an eye on the development of the guideline? Dave (talk) 03:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me this discussion is taking place. I'm on the road now, but will try to respond as time permits. Dave (talk) 04:14, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding Tie Fork Rest Area to Tucker, Utah. I especially like the photo. I wasn't able to stop when I passed that way myself a couple of weeks ago. Well done! Ntsimp (talk) 01:21, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I've been feeling burned out as of late, so it's great to hear I'm actually doing some good around here. =-) Dave (talk) 01:41, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
U.S. Route 491 is a north–south U.S. Highway serving the Four Corners region of the United States. One of the newest designations in the U.S. Highway system, it was created in 2003 as a renumbering of U.S. Route 666. With the 666 designation, this road was nicknamed Devil's Highway because of the common Christian belief that 666 is the Number of the Beast. This satanic connotation, combined with a high fatality rate along the New Mexico portion, convinced some people the highway was cursed. The problem was compounded with persistent sign theft. These factors led to two efforts to renumber the highway, first by officials in Arizona, later in New Mexico. Since the renumbering, as a result of safety improvement projects, fatality rates have decreased. The highway runs through Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah, as well as the tribal nations of the Navajo Nation and Ute Mountain Ute Tribe. Features along the route include an extinct volcanic core named Shiprock, Mesa Verde National Park, and the self-proclaimed pinto-bean capital of the world, Dove Creek, Colorado. (more...)
Dave, the image sizes are fine forced up. The rules changed more than a year ago at MoS and IUP. It's up to you, but I'd be surprised if you found the small images better than the 240s. What kind of monitor/window size/browser are you on? Tony(talk)17:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
About the only benefit to not forcing the image sizes is that if they aren't specified, individual editor's preferences kick in. I have mine set to specify 300px thumbnails from back before the default was changed last year. I've left it there, so your change actually increased the photos on my display (from 240px to 300px) but decreased it for non-editors (240px to 220px). Imzadi 1979→17:29, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objections either way. For the record, I just check the MoS and it still says that in general image sizes should not be forced, but does allow for judgement. I don't have a strong preference either way, and won't object if you revert my changes. Dave (talk) 17:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it! I'll keep out of it for a while. Any thoughts on splitting out the movies filmed there or that list of songs, etc into another article? I've done it with a handful of Martial Arts related articles (Eskrima, Muay Thai, etc) where the lists of movies where the art was used was outweighing the article about the Art, itself.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ17:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You
Thanks, I know the terms of overlink, but infact it wasn't just additional, if it was I would be initiating every word to link. Yes, have a nice day --Corusant (yadyadyada) 18:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I was wondering if you got my message, of course it won't, but I was wondering if the picture for Merchant was useful, I am hoping someone can expand the article Merchant, since, I would like to expand the importance commerce is, otherwise, it's good enough for me. Later, man(:O_O:).--Corusant (yadyadyada) 23:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Pre-RFC straw poll
There is a brief straw poll to see if conducting a RFC on the question of coordinates in road articles is worthwhile at WT:RJL. Your input would be appreciated. --Rschen775408:23, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This edition is going out to all USRD WikiProject members (current, former, or potential) in addition to other subscribers as part of a roll call to update the participants list. Anyone that would like to continue to receive this newsletter in the future needs to update the subscription list if they are not already subscribed.
Dave: See the talk page for Route 66. I believe that the SR-2 edit was valid and have provided a reference. Regards, --Manway15:20, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Am glad the pics are helping with the railroad articles. Sometimes you find something that looks interesting and needs more information; after you do the research on that, you've learned something, gotten an image and some refs on top of it! :-) We hope (talk) 15:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Location map help
hi, i saw some of your comments on the location map page and am assuming you have some knowledge about it. how do i make a name appear on mouseover to a marker:
Re: Solders Summit--started out with a not so hot copy of the card. What caught my eye, though, was the message on the back from a father to his young son re: how many locomotives were needed for the climb. So I started looking for a nicer copy. One thing that surprised me, though, was their use of the open observation cars. Most of the trains with them such as the Oriental Limited, billed them as "tourist class" observation accomodations; the enclosed cars were for the "first class" passengers only. D&RGW did this in reverse--using the open cars in good weather and charging a quarter extra to ride in them. :-) We hope (talk) 18:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BTW-have a link for a card showing a similar practice re: bank engines on the Siskyou/Dollarhide trestle for the SP's Shasta. Let me find the link I have for the best copy of that, get it to Commons and leave the file link here for you. We hope (talk)
There isn't any rush on this, so feel free to put this posting down the internal priorities list a few notches. I did some futzing on the Interstate 8 article just to remove the SPSs from the reference list. Minus the missing page numbers since I don't have direct access to the collected statutes, the California history of I-8 no longer uses roadgeek websites. However, it doesn't have much of a chronology for the freeway construction. Now maybe if I get that HighBeam Research account I might have some luck tracking down some old newspaper articles that might list when some sections of the freeway opened.
Anyways, rschen mentioned that you had some ideas on some of the back history pre-Interstate era. I'm personally interested in finding enough to flesh out the basic history so that the article could get through GAN. When it comes to the M-16, US 16 and I-96 situation in Michigan, the US 16 article for MI has the Indian trail and plank road history. It also has all of M-16's history because that was a 1:1 conversion in 1926. Anything post 1960s though will be in the I-96 article, which will only have a basic summary of the US 16/M-16 stuff. I kinda see something similar with US 80 and I-8: put the detail into a US 80 article and a summary into I-8. Either way though, at some point, I-8 needs a little more California history insert because it really doesn't have any yet. Thoughts? This is kinda low priority since I have plenty of Michigan stuff I'm still trying to do. Imzadi 1979→12:01, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, unfortunately I'm aware of more history on the Arizona side than the California side. The history behind the Arizona portion of I-8 goes all the way back to the Gadsden Purchase, now the southern part of Arizona, which we purchased from Mexico mostly to build the First Transcontinental Railroad. Conventional wisdom said the route of any railroad across the United States needed to be in the south to avoid the Rockies and the snow to be usable year round. Problem was what was then Arizona was also very rugged and mountainous and engineers couldn't figure out how to build it without crossing into what was then part of Mexico. The AZ portion of I-8 closely follows what was to be the route of the First Transcontinental Railroad. (except the route railroad was to serve what is now Maricopa, Arizona which is bypassed by I-8. The government already started cancelling the primary communication link in the region, Butterfield Overland Mail service, which largely followed the same route, in anticipation of a transcontinental railroad soon being built. However, anti-slavery advocates began to ratchet up the pressure on congress and demanded the route be moved farther north as they feared building this route would literally put the slave trade in high-tech and high-gear. Anti-slavery advocates succeeded in getting the more northerly route approved which passed entirely through free states and territories(via what is now Cheyenne, Wyoming; Ogden, Utah; and Sacramento, California) which outraged the south. This was one of the largest not-directly-related to slavery causes of the civil war (but indirectly it was slavery related) and was one of the primary reasons why the Arizona Territory (CSA) seceded from the union. The route was eventually built after the war by the predecessors to the Southern Pacific Railroad, and called the Sunset Route (after one of the Texas predecessors to the SP that helped build it). This line today hosts Amtrak's Sunset Limited. This route later became the corridor for US-80 (except US-80 jigged northward to serve Phoenix between Gila Bend and Casa Grande) and today's I-8 in western Arizona (again except for bypassing Maricopa) and I-10 in Eastern Arizona. However, the Sunset Route in California is between the I-8 and I-10 corridors (no modern highway exactly follows it) and so the I-8 corridor in CA has a different history. I do know the corridor in CA also originated with the railroads, loosely following the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railway, which did have to dip into Mexico to get a descent route across the mountains of California (though IIRC, regrading and Tunnels were later used to shorten the route and keeping it all inside the USA, not sure on that). However, I don't know as much about that rail line, it's not as famous as the rail line that helped start the Civil War. =-) Hope that helps. Unfortunately this is from general reading, I don't have specific sources for everything above. However, the article on the First Transcontinental Railroad does mention quite a bit about the original route, and it is well sourced (but almost all of that article is sourced to the Railroad Museum in Sacramento). But I don't think the I-8 article could be considered complete until that was in there. Dave (talk) 23:19, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
GAs don't need to be comprehensive though, they just need to touch on the major points. FAs have to be complete though. The idea is to get the core history of I-8 itself into the article and cited properly; the railroad background stuff can come later. Imzadi 1979→00:04, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. However, last time I looked at the I-8 article it didn't even acknowledge the existence of the Gadsden Purchase or the Sunset Route. If you won't want to go into detail yet as you're only shooting for GA, fine, but they should be at least mentioned. Dave (talk) 00:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS, for the record, I checked Google Maps, the SD&AE does indeed still dip into Mexico, at least on one occasion, It's hard to tell if it crosses the border in a second area or just kisses it. =-) Dave (talk) 00:11, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did see he posted another request for unblock, but I didn't mean to revert that ... I know he's not allowed to remove the block template until such block has ended, but I should have seen that he did both (deleted the block and added the unblock request) in the same edit. So that was a mistake on my part. My apologies. --McDoobAU9304:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I figured that was the case. I briefly thought of restoring his unblock review request, but let's be honest, we both know what his chances are. Dave (talk) 04:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm keeping an eye out for other Cars character accounts ... he seems to be working on Cars 2 now, as Jeff Gorvette, Nigel Gearsley and Shu Todoriki (what Yip was probably trying to do) have appeared recently. --McDoobAU9304:21, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abuse Filter on the Article Feedback Tool
Hey there :). You're being contacted because you're an edit filter manager, At the moment, we're developing Version 5 of the Article Feedback Tool, which you may or may not have heard about. If you haven't; for the first time, this will involve a free-text box where readers can submit comments :). Obviously, there's going to be junk, and we want to minimise that junk. To do so, we're working the Abuse Filter into the tool.
For this to work, we need people to write and maintain filters. I'd be very grateful if you could take a look at the discussion here and the attached docs, and comment and contribute! Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not the best person to ask with this. I only briefly dabbled with edit filters, and that was mostly to test some things at the request of a fellow admin. In fact, I should probably relinquish that bit as I really don't use it. Dave (talk) 16:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My only comment is I wonder how big of a deal this is with line charts. I'm absolutely sure that somewhere out there a policy nazi is screaming original research about them. However, unlike maps, a line chart is useful for one purpose and one purpose only, to show a trend of the relationship between (usually) 2 variables. Any other use would be original research. Whereas with maps that scope of use is less clear. I'll copy this discussion to the talk page to avoid decentralizing the conversation.Dave (talk) 14:10, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you revert my addition of a category to the Interstate 80 page? Categories like that ("Category:Interstate Highways in . . .") don't go on a redirect page (unless the article doesn't have an actual page or the redirect is most likely to be converted into an actual articles). Believe me; I got "fussed at" for doing just that. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 10:15, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've got 3 concerns with that edit. 1- It's a crap magnet. In other words, it encourages others to add Interstate Highways in California, Pennsylvania, etc. because "I-80 flows through those states too you know..." 2- I really don't see the value of the edit, it's adding categories to article X, because article Y has a similar category. In other words, adding categories for the sake of adding categories. 3- The big one. The route of I-80 across Wyoming was derived from the route of the Lincoln Highway, which itself was derived from the route of the First Transcontinental Railroad/Overland Route (Union Pacific Railroad), which was in turn derived from the routes of the California Trail, Mormon Trail, and Oregon Trail. All of which have well sourced articles. Adding in this [5], for for about 15 minutes of effort, instead of these categories of questionable value, a C class article for Interstate 80 in Wyoming could have been created, making the issue moot, and actually bettering the encyclopedia in the process. Just my opinions, take them or leave them. Cheers Dave (talk) 16:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for August 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Interstate 580 (Nevada), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Eagle Valley and Spaghetti Bowl (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Would you mind taking a look at the CA 52 or CA 56 ACR? Unfortunately ACR's backlogged and we're short of capable reviewers. I can only send one of them to FAC at a time, so I don't need the other one reviewed for a while. If you don't have the time, no worries. Thanks! --Rschen775405:25, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Deliberately introducing false material? Disruptively editing? Check this out--[6]--and read the first subsection (Toponimia). I first read the Spanish version, was curious if that was true (apparently it's not, according to the English one, but that's 100% unsourced as far as I can tell) and noted that there was no etymology section for the city in English, which is abnormal for cities with names that aren't immediately apparent. I didn't scan the entire article looking for its etymology hidden within the text of the article, true, which qualifies at worst as ignorant... and you throw out a UW3? Add a source for the named-after-a-general assertion (totally could be true but if you know anything about Nevada, you know it'd be likely for it to have a Spanish-influenced background, as the ES wikipedia assumes), if that's yours, and in any case please don't just use templates like that for logical statements that happen to disagree with unsourced assertions elsewhere in the text. Red Slash21:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem took me all of 3 seconds to find that. State of Nevada's official website trumps some blog in a 3rd world country anyday my friend. Dave (talk) 21:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The one thing I will give you is my use of the word "intentional" was not assuming good faith. You may slap me on the wrist for that. Charges of article ownership and ignorance the Spanish origins of names in the western US were not only equally inappropriate, but ironic given the situation. Dave (talk) 22:58, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! As a past participant in the U.S. portion of the USRD Cup, you may be interested to know that we are doing it again this year! Signups are at the above page and the contest will begin February 1. --Rschen775410:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Great Basin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Central Corridor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Yes. In addition I owe Imzadi a review or two. I doubt I can get to this this week, but next week I should. Thanks for the heads up. Dave (talk) 19:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rschen7754 completed the spot check of sources tonight. The article just awaits the conclusion of your review for promotion. I've replied there already. Imzadi 1979→10:11, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thistle is a ghost town in Utah County, Utah, about 65 miles (105 km) southeast of Salt Lake City in the United States. During the era of steam locomotives, the town's primary industry was servicing trains for the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad. The fortunes of the town were closely linked with those of the railroad until the changeover to diesel locomotives, when the town started to decline. Just downstream from Thistle, a slump had been in slow motion for years, with no serious thought of investigation. The landslide situation deteriorated rapidly in April 1983, with the town evacuated on April 17. The landslide dammed the Spanish Fork River and almost completely destroyed the town; only a few structures were left partially standing (schoolhouse pictured). It also severed key transportation arteries and left parts of eastern Utah isolated for months until replacements could be built. Federal and state government agencies have claimed that it was the most costly landslide in U.S. history, and it resulted in the first presidential declared disaster area in the state of Utah. The remains of Thistle are visible from U.S. Route 6 or from the California Zephyr passenger train. (Full article...)
Edit request for main page blurb for Thistle article
Hi Moabdave. I made an edit request for the main page blurb for the Thistle, Utah article, but it hasn't been answered for several hours and time is wasting. Since you're an admin and have been involved in getting this on the main page, do you mind taking a look at my request? Thanks, alanyst13:08, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Bencherlite took care of it, but while I'm here, good work on the article, and congratulations on getting it featured! alanyst14:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was asleep when this came in. I'm glad this got taken care of and you like the article. Thanks for helping to improve it. Dave (talk) 21:34, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Featured Article
If you do not agree with my nomination, then oppose it, instead of deleting it outright. I suggest you read the F.A rules before attempting to edit that page. Thank you. --Trimmed Steok (talk) 19:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It takes time. I've spent months working on articles before they earned a status of Featured Article. The first step at this time would probably be to nominate the article for a Peer Review to receive feedback on how to improve it. The final step would be to nominate the article at WP:FAC, which is where the final debate on weather the article is ready for Featured article status occurs. Cheers Dave (talk) 19:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping. Yes I'm interested, and I'm trying to re-balance my priorities to make more Wikipedia time. I see you've been working on the I-80 and I-84 articles, cool!. As for US 6, I should have some pictures I could contribute to the effort. Let me check..... Dave (talk) 17:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As for I-84 User:CL has a cool b/w pic of Weber Canyon with a US 30S shield on his flickr page, you might ask him about using that pic in the article. Dave (talk) 18:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of Flikr, UDOT has a flickr feed, and they have an AWESOME pick of a Diverging diamond interchange under construction in St. George, Utah that would be a great addition to the article. I've been meaning to ask them if they'd remove the NC clause from their CC-NC-SA license so we could put the image on commons. Dave (talk) 18:13, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
sign.jpg){kind=link}
