User talk:Wpwatchdog

Adoption welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia, Wpwatchdog, and thanks for seeking me out as an adopter. I would be delighted to adopt you! Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I think you'll enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! As an initial pointer, remember to sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. I will watch your contributions page and help out where needed, and if there is a specific article you would like me to help work on, just let me know. Again, welcome! --Eustress (talk) 16:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Whitefish Point Light and Tawas Point State Park and Peninsula Point Light

Dear Wpwatchdog, Welcome to Wikipedia. Nice addition to the former. The latter could probably use your help, and you seem to have some idea on the resources. Happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:52, 2 November 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Good job

Nice work on creating Whitefish Point Bird Observatory. Some suggestions:

  • Integrate the quotes into existing sentences. Most of the quotes you've added don't require the block form.
  • Cite your sources completely using the correct format (see WP:CITE; e.g., if you cite a web site, use WP:Cite web).
  • Try to keep article encyclopedic. Don't need to quote people so often, just cite them.

Also, you've got 101 edits. Keep going and you'll be up to novice status quick! --Eustress (talk) 02:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whitefish Point Bird Observatory

Eustress, thank you for the pointers. Please check out the revision of Whitefish Point Bird Observatory. --Wpwatchdog (talk) 16:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added an infobox on the page, which you can work to fill in. This article is really coming along. I think you should keep an eye on getting it to WP:GA status. Here are a few more pointers (I'll keep giving advice as long as it's welcomed):
  • Citations should always directly follow punctuation marks--no spaces in between (I fixed this on the article).
  • When a citation is used more than once, then you should incorporate WP:REFNAME.
  • A good template article for you to follow in expanding this one might be Yellowstone National Park.
  • Usually a section needs to have at least two to three sentences in order to be able to stand on its own.
  • {{convert}} should be used when referring to U.S. measurements (e.g., ft., in.) in order to accommodate our non-U.S. readers.
I'm pulling a lot of this policy stuff from memory, but you can learn all about it at WP:STYLE. Keep up the good work! --Eustress (talk) 17:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And THANK YOU for creating the article. Best regards and happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Like a good fly fishing guide

Eustress, you are like a good fly fishing guide. Thank you for speeding up my learning curve. I like the infobox you added. I added information and attempted to make the corrections you suggested on the Whitefish Point Bird Observatory article. I wasn't able to figure out how to make web citations WP:REFNAME. Also I wasn't sure if I should use WPBO throughout the article instead of typing it out each time. Please do continue giving advice as your time permits. --Wpwatchdog (talk) 21:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment. REFNAME is a bit tricky, so I updated a few of your refs with it incorporated (see citation #2, how instead of being repeated multiple times in the Ref section, it now reflects how many times it is cited in the text; this prevents citation inflation and ensures Wikipedia is transparent in that viewers can see if information comes more from one source or another). You can update the others--the shortcut name can be whatever you want.
More things to do:
  • Picture captions only terminate with a period if a complete sentence
  • In section headings, only the first letter is capitalized unless it is a proper noun (so "WPBO History" --> "WPBO history"; etc.)
  • When a page is also known by an acronym, be sure it has a redirect page listed (I went ahead and created one for this page--just run a search for WPMO!)
  • When you get all the content you would like to have in the article, you will need to modify the introductory section (called a lead) per WP:LEAD. Also, you don't need inline citations in the lead unless there is controversial material (see WP:LEADCITE)
  • The list under Owl research may be better presented in prose, especially since there is no lead-in to it. Review WP:LISTS
  • Be sure your sub-section headings are parallel in naming convention and pertain to the overarching section; e.g., "Owl research" is not parallel with "Songbirds" (perhaps review WP:HEAD)
Cheers! --Eustress (talk) 22:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think I completed the above "things to do" but I don't know what to do with the redirect page. The redirect page you created is for WPMO but the acronym is actually WPBO. If I search for WPBO, I get redirected to WOSU-TV. I don't know enough yet to edit someone else's redirects so I will appreciate your suggestions. Thank you for your continued help. --Wpwatchdog (talk) 19:19, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Those acronyms sure are pretty similar (or I've been staring at a computer screen too long). [lol] I fixed the correct redirect to now embody a disambiguation page, and I requested the old one be deleted per WP:Speedy delete. Check it out!
I'll do a quick WP:copy edit run-through of your article. If you feel it meets the WP:Good article criteria, then you should nominate it. (There are instructions on WP:GA on how to do it.) If the article doesn't pass this time, you'll at least get some great feedback on how to improve it. Good luck! --Eustress (talk) 01:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You edited the "Diurnal raptor census" section to change the "hawk dune" to 66 ft north of Lake Superior instead of above Lake Superior. The word north would place the hawk dune in Canada. The word above refers to above Lake Superior's water level. Should we change the line to "66 ft above Lake Superior's water level"?
This artice will eventually be scutinized by Michigan birders so I hope to imporve it as much as possible. I will try to nominate it for WP:GA once the corrections are finalized. Thank you. --Wpwatchdog (talk) 14:43, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarifications. You will obviously know more about the WPBO (and birding, in general) than me, but it's good we catch these issues now. Yeah, "above" was a bit ambiguous regarding the water level, so your suggestion seems good (considering the source doesn't specify). Regarding geographical location, I'll compromise and just put the county it's located in. This is more personal preference, so if you still don't like it, then make what change you see best fit. --Eustress (talk) 03:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

The Exemplary Adoptee Barnstar
For being a wonderful adoptee and for becoming a great asset to Wikipedia. Keep up the good work! Eustress (talk) 00:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


You've made incredible progress over the past few months, having even promoted your own GAN. As far as I'm concerned, you're now "graduated" from the Adopt-a-User program! Drop me a note whenever you need a hand or want to say hi, and I hope you'll look for ways to serve the Wikipedia community and help other newcomers. Also, you're close to your first service award, which you may proudly claim if you so choose when you have 200 edits. (Check your edit count here.}

Best wishes --Eustress (talk) 00:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Wow! Thank you so much for the kind gesture...you've been a pleasure to work with, and I anticipate that the best is yet to come! --Eustress (talk) 21:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shelldrake, Michigan nominated for DYK

Hi. I've nominated Shelldrake, Michigan, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Thanks, Ntsimp (talk) 03:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Shelldrake, Michigan

Updated DYK query On January 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Shelldrake, Michigan, 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.

--Dravecky (talk) 22:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template

Thought you might like this template (Template:User WikiProject Michigan) better than the one you currently have on your page. Either way, hope things are well. --Eustress (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan F. Cobb

Apparently, the editor who nominated this page for GA status had no interest in improving it. Would you like to take over the effort? If not, I'll have to fail the article because the 7 days waiting period has passed and that would be a shame. The article is interesting, but just not there yet. If you take it, I'd be happy to give you 3-5 additional days (and a barnstar if you manage to get it promoted). - Mgm|(talk) 09:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, unable to help on this one. Neither Miramar nor Plimsoll Ship Data have anything on the vessel. Mjroots (talk) 22:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for looking. --Wpwatchdog (talk) 22:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mgm Sorry, I have been somewhat swamped with school and have been unable to put any time into this article lately... I no doubt want to help make this a good article.--Sammyknoxg (talk) 07:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MacGyverMagic, I just finished some heavy editing on the Nathan F Cobb article. I haven't located the source yet to make the last two corrections that you suggested. I don't think citations are needed in the Infobox as the same citation is used in the body of the article. I left them there for now.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 15:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, citing facts in the text rather than the infobox whenever possible is the preferred action. I'll give the article a look; let me know when you've more changes. - Mgm|(talk) 12:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Wpwatchdog, glad you enjoyed the article... collecting the information about it has turned me into, I guess you would say pseudo shipwreck buff, it was very enjoyable. Anyways, information about this vessel is very rare for some reason. Before I say anything else, I understand wikipedia is collective and I am enough of a big boy not to be insulted by the article being changed around. After all, the end game of this is for people like me who wanted to know something about the vessel's history, to have easy access to it.

I began this article after spending many vacations at my friends beach house and always wondering about the shipwreck sign outside his house. The book Merchant Sail Vol. V, an obscure book I found in auxiliary storage at UF's Smathers Library is where I found definitive information about the ship's statistics and year build. Before I found this book, I was basing the size and tonnage on estimations from eye-witnesses at the time of the wreck. However, in the lead paragraph, before 275 ships were listed (Cobb included), the author William Armstrong Fairburn states how it is to be regretted that desired data about many vessels built in Rockland, Maine between 1837 and 1920 has not been preserved. While Fairburn's six volume series documenting ships from the aforementioned era, might not be "the end all be all," I'd say it is close to it. I would like to find more information about the vessel and feel a sense that most of the fragmented information about the ship has been put together, but data is sparse.

Also, I am somewhat new to wikipedia, and don't really know what the "industry standards" are, but is it wrong for me to cite a book like Merchant Sail, being that your run of the mill editor/wikipedian will no doubt have a whirlwind of a time verifying it? Thanks for the editing help and the thoughtful content headers, I will work on addressing the remaining oversights.Sammyknoxg (talk) 07:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah info sure is hard to come by. Thanks for looking though! In regard to this being a good article status, I think it should be taken into account that this was essentially started with almost zero information and the original sources were provided to me by the Volusia County Government Beach Services upon request and before this page, there was no easily accessible data about the ship. I hope at some point I can feel a sense of finalization about this topic. Thanks for your help!Sammyknoxg (talk) 17:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Wpwatchdog, I just found a new source for the Nathan F Cobb article from the Annual Report of the Operations of the United States Life-Saving Services for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1897, which clears some things up about the rescue efforts. It also clarifies that the first rescue boat was carried down on a man drawn wagon and the second one was "carried down," I guess by hand. It also includes that Hiram Shaw was the District 7 Superintendent and had dispatched to the Jupiter Inlet Life Saving Station to send a life saving beach apparatus via train. I think this source really helps the article. Also, I found another source that may or may not be helpful and is not included in the article. It is a NY Times archived article from June 20, 1892 and chronicles a disturbance between crew members ending with charges against the captain and one mate, from a mate beating another with a belaying pin (wow!). The article states they were in route from Mobile, AL to New York. It may be irrelevant though, since it presumably wasn't the only route it took. If you get a chance, could you look over it for any errors and edits you think should be made. Thanks! Sammyknoxg (talk) 22:59, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea! I will hopefully get that done tonight or tomorrow. Thanks for the suggestion.Sammyknoxg (talk) 23:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey WP, I finished up with some of the suggestions you had. If you could take a look at it and see if it looks good to you, that would be appreciated. Also, I am not sure if the block quote I provided is accurately attributed according to wiki standards. Thanks for your help! Sammyknoxg (talk) 13:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SS Superior City

I've moved the article to more accurately fit the naming convention for steamship articles. Nice article by the way. You might be interested in another source to expand the article. Miramar Ship Index, The entry is here[1] (have to do it this way to link to search result page). Mjroots (talk) 19:14, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "2116820". Miramar Ship Index. Retrieved 9 February 2009.

Comet (shipwreck)

It looks like you did a cut and past move of the artice. By cutting & pasting the article's history is lost. No great damage done as it can be put right. If you need to move an article in future, please use the move tab at the top of the page. Further info at WP:MOVE. Mjroots (talk) 15:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I've made the same mistake myself. It must be one of the "rites of passage" of Wikipedia! <g> Mjroots (talk) 17:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've nominated Comet (steamboat), an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Also, please confirm that the ref. used in footnotes #2 & 7 is Sault Ste. Marie Evening News. Thanks, PFHLai (talk) 15:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks for the confirmation, Wpwatchdog. I'll update the hook on T:TDYK. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Comet (steamboat)

Updated DYK query On February 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Comet (steamboat), 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.

--Dravecky (talk) 21:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to you, for this excellent article! Nice work! --Kralizec! (talk) 23:21, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words about the Comet (steamboat) article. It was an interesting research - so many ships have amazing stories behind them. --Wpwatchdog (talk) 15:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: SS Edmund Fitzgerald

As an administrator I am able to protect the article, but it does not qualify for protection under the protection policy since it is not experiencing the level of vandalism that is sufficient for protection to be required. -MBK004 23:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indiana

If you look at the description, it says that it's been determined to be eligible for listing — in other words, it could be on the Register, but it's not. Nyttend (talk) 18:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Le Griffon

Updated DYK query On March 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Le Griffon, 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.

Shubinator (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Le Griffon

Hi wpw, I've left a query at Talk:Le Griffon which you seemed to have done most of the work on. Could you look at it for me please? Cheers, Bigger digger (talk) 00:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sturgeon Point Light

FYI, I didn't create the article although I added a lot to it. I'm not seeing the formatting problem. Did Berean Hunter fix it? 7&6=thirteen (talk) 13:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I am using a hotel computer. I am viewing it precisely the way you describe it. Maybe it has something twith the computer settings. It isn't (IMHO) an inherent problem in the article, as it doesn't display that way on my portable or desktop. Maybe somebody else can take a look and come up with suggestions. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:36, 29 May 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Stannard Rock Light

Nice job! You found some very neat and different sources on line that are new to me. And that means you really thought this through. **** Happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 23:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Glad to be of assistance. This was an article that needed to be created. I'm sorry to say that I ran into the frustrum of a cone shape somewhere else on some source about another lighthouse. They were not talking about this light. It perfectly describes the shape, much better than the typical wiki link to "cone", which in a geometric sense is just plain misleading and confusing. If you can take a little bit of time, I have worked most of the Michigan (and other Great Lakes States and some ocean) lighthouse articles, and it has been a vast learning experience for me. Except for this particular light, Terry Pepper is really where one has to start. The Lighthouse Digest almost always has fresh info (best on line source for the ARLHS numbers), and they have a lot of good links that one can borrow. I really post holed on Sturgeon Point Light because its in my neighborhood. Where I've worked those articles, they all have a really good collection of external links, and that would be a good place to start on any of these. Your finding of the two books in Google was great. They have lots of potential use on a great many of the Michigan lighthouse articles. Thank you for bringing a fresh viewpoint and a fresh brain. Keep up the good work, as there is lots more to do. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 02:16, 12 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Resources on Great Lakes lighthouses

I went through the Coast Guard lighthouse bibliography (not including the part on dissertations), and discovered the following sources, which could be salted into at least "Further reading" on various Great Lakes lighthouses. I did not include the books, etc., that I put into "further reading" on Stannard Rock Light.

LIGHTHOUSE RESOURCES

Barnard, J.G. "Lighthouse Engineering As Displayed at the Centennial Exhibition." American Society of Civil Engineers Transactions 8 (Mar 1879), p. 55.

Harris, Patricia. "Michigan City: Indiana's Only Lighthouse." The Keeper's Log (Spring, 1987), pp. 22-25.

Harrison, Timothy. "Big Sable, The Queen of the Lake." Lighthouse Digest (Jul 1997), pp. 1-3.

"Harsen's Island Saint Clair Flats Range Light Station Under New Ownership." Lighthouse Digest (Mar 2003), pp. 28-29.

Howard-Filler, Saralee R. "Grey's Grief." Michigan History 70, no 5 (1986), pp. 20-23.

Huggins, Michael. "Only Yesterday: History of the Monroe Lighthouses, Monroe, Mich." The Keeper's Log (Spring 2000), pp. 10-15.

"Important New Light Station at Milwaukee, Wis." Lighthouse Service Bulletin III, 50 (Feb 1, 1928), p. 229.

Janda, Louie & Rosie. "End of an Era: Cana Island, Wisconsin." The Keeper’s Log (Winter 1997), pp. 23-

Janda, Louie & Rosie. "End of an Era: Cana Island, Wisconsin." The Keeper’s Log (Winter 1997), pp. 23-

"Lightships and Lighthouses. Light-House Construction." Along the Shore I, No. 4 (Jun 1909), p. 17; No. 5 (Jul 1909), p. 17; No. 6 (Aug 1909), p. 17; ". . .Light-Houses on Submarine Stone Foundations." No. 7 (Sep 1909), p. 17.

Lopez, Victor. "This Old Lighthouse: Chicago Harbor Beacon Gets a Facelift." Coast Guard (Sep 1997), pp. 24-25.

Lynn, Bruce. "A Light is on in the Graveyard [Whitefish Point]." Lighthouse Digest (Aug 1997), pp. 1-3.

Merkel, Jim. "Big Sable Point." Lighthouse Digest (Sep 2000), pp. 16-17.

________. "Michigan Island: The Mistake that Became a Treasure." Lighthouse Digest (Mar 1999), pp. 21-24.

________. "Long Island [Wisconsin]: The Overlooked Lighthouse of the Apostles." Lighthouse Digest (Mar 2000), pp. 19-21.

Mulholland, Ray. "Light Stations on Great Lakes Closed During Winter Season." Coast Guard Magazine (Mar 1950), pp. 16-19.

Murphy, L.A. "Investigation of Foundation Stability at White Shoal Light Station, Lake Michigan." Coast Guard Engineers Digest No. 96 (Jan-Feb, 1956), pp. 34-38.

Nelson, Bruce A. "The History of Big Point Sable Light Station." Great Lakes Lighthouse Keepers Association The Beacon 18, No. 4 (Winter 2000/01), pp. 14-15.

"Resident Memories--Of Schooners, Steamers, and Storms [George Keller, Keeper of White Shoal Lighthouse]." Lighthouse Digest (Apr 2000), pp. 4-5.

"Round Island Passage Light Station." Proceedings of the Merchant Marine Council 5 (Sep 1948), p. 145.

"Round Island Passage Light Station Established." Coast Guard Engineers Digest No. 51 (Jul-Aug, 1948), pp. 28-29; No. 52 (Sep-Oct 1948), pp. 10-12.

Smith, S01cott T., ed. "The Lighthouses of Illinois." The Keeper’s Log (Spring 1994), pp. 13-19.

Timm, Richard. "Sands Point Lighthouse." The Keeper’s Log (Fall 1989), pp. 14-15.

"A Tour of the Lights of the Straits." Michigan History 70 (Sep/Oct 1986), pp. 17-29.

"Unwatched Light with Stand-By at Isle Royal Light Station, Mich." Lighthouse Service Bulletin III, 62 (Feb 1, 1929), pp. 276-277.

"Winter Lights, Great Lakes." Lighthouse Service Bulletin I, 35 (Nov 1914), p. 137.

Grant, John. Legendary Lighthouses: The Companion to the PBS Television Series. Old Saybrook, CT: Globe Pequot Press, 1998.

Hall, Stephen P. Split Rock: Epoch of a Lighthouse. St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society, 1978.

Holden, Thom. Above and Below: Lighthouses and Shipwrecks of Isle Royale. Houghton, MI: Isle Royale Natural History Association, 1985.

McShane, Myron. The Presqu’ile Lighthouse: Its History and Its Keepers. [?????]

Noble, Dennis L., & T. Michael O'Brien. Sentinels of the Rocks: From "Graveyard Coast" to National Lakeshore. Marquette: Northern Michigan University Press, 1979.

Pletcher, Jean Edith, et al. Memories of the Michigan City Lighthouse. Michigan City: Michigan City Historical Society, 1991.

Vent, Myron H. South Manitou Island. Springfield: The Goodway Press, Inc., 1973.

Happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Ile Parisienne Light

Nice picture at Marinas.com, aerial photograph of Ile Parisienne Light. Here is Lighthouse Depot, Ile Parisienne Light.. But of course, I'm sure you've Googled it, and I don't mean to clutter your note with crap. Unfortunately, I know almost nothing about resources on Canadian lights. The general 'further reading" stuff that I've put in the articles does have some resources that do all of the Great Lakes; but other than that, you've hit me at a real weak spot in my knowledge base. What I gave you was from the Bibliography published by he U.S. Coast Guard, which of course only accidentally might mention the Canada lights. You might try Batnerd.com and Terry Pepper's Seeing the Light might mention some resources. Greak Lakes Lightkeepers Association (Terry Pepper is their executive director) may be able to give you some direction on where to look. I'm sure that Terry Pepper knows more about lighthouses (at least on the Great Lakes) than almost anyone on the planet. You could write to him directly. He is very busy, but very approachable. Sorry that I can't be of more help, but you found my limitation. As Dirty Harry once said, "A man's got to know his limitations." I'm in terra incognita for the next week, so I may not respond promptly. Best to you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 18:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Terry Pepper's e-mail address is: Terry Pepper <terry@terrypepper.com>. His website does not include Canadian lights, but I would guess that he knows the sources. Best regards. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]
You are aware of course of the Olczewski book? Not to mention that some of those with "encyclopedic" in the title might be on point. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]
Brief mention of the light. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]
Island for sale. for 1.3 million Dollars or Dollours, eh? Advertised on facebook.7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Great Lakes Light Keepers Association tour. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Canadian topographical map. Satelite map. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Frequently asked questions. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]
Geology, Sault Ste. Marie-Ile Parisienne, Ontario by R. Hay, Dept. of Mines and Technical Surveys (Ottawa) Canada. Geological Survey. Map 1181A. at Open Library. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]
Waypoint on boundary of "Navigable waters" Code of Federal Regulations.
Great Lakes light list.

Even Terry Pepper has his limitations. Maybe you should do an article on Ile Parisienne with the light on it (included within it)? See for example, Granite Island (Michigan), Grand Island (Michigan) and Menagerie Island Light, to name a few off the top of my head. There are at least two more on Lake, Michigan St. Helena Island Light and St. Martin Island Light, too. I'm out of here. Happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Here's an island/light on Lake Erie, West Sister Island. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Thank you for the referral to the West Sister Island article. It is a good guideline for an Ile Parisienne article.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 14:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to reinvent the wheel. Glad to be of service. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

DYK for Stannard Rock Light

Updated DYK query On June 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stannard Rock Light, 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 14:35, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for SS Myron

Updated DYK query On October 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Myron, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Mifter (talk) 21:28, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on this great article! Kudos to you, sir! — Kralizec! (talk) 23:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mariners'

Thank you, I'll make an appropriate revision. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 17:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shipwrecks and Ships merger discussion.

Hello. I'm posting this notice here since you're listed as a member of the Shipwrecks project. A merge proposal has been suggested on the project talk page here. Suggestions and ideas are welcome. Thanks. --Brad (talk) 23:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Miztec (schooner barge)

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SS Edmund Fitzgerald

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for your efforts to improve SS Edmund Fitzgerald. A couple years ago I tried to get this up to WP:GAC standards but was not successful. Jehochman Talk 16:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SS Edmund Fitzgerald confusion

Not disputing - I'm not involved with the article, just FYI. There seems to be confusion about where. Constructed in River Rouge but launched in Ecorse - I somehow doubt it.

In the Great Lakes Engineering Works : As the new ‘Queen of the Lakes’ was launched into the lake Saturday June 7, 1958 from GLEW’s Ecorse shipyard, Mrs. Edmund Fitzgerald had the privilege of breaking the champagne bottle on Fitzgerald ’s bow. Slightsmile (talk) 03:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the Great Lakes Engineering Works article is not accurate. From what I've read, the confusion comes from the company having three different yards but the Fitzgerald was clearly built in the River Rouge yard. The GLEW article needs some cleaning up.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 12:51, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edmund Fitzgerald

Nice work on the Edmund Fitzgerald so far. I drove by and edited a sentence without realizing someone was working on it—hope I didn't interfere! --Andy Walsh (talk) 02:48, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for CURV-III

The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for USCGC Woodrush (WLB-407)

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Work area for 12/29 comments on Edmund Fitzgerald article

Howdy. I was following the pattern that we used for the 12/26 comments. Leave the original reviewers comments in the review section, and make a copy on the main talk page as our work space. Then, once that workspace is completed/superceded, move it to the GA review section as the reviewer did with the first one. I made the copy but noticed that you renamed and are working the "original" in the review section. If you want to do differently, thats cool, but at the moment I'm assuming it's a mixup and plan to move the stuff you did to the one on the main article talk page. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I messed it up. Thank you for the fix.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 15:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Still working on itNorth8000 (talk) 15:28, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reference syntax

In the third paragraph under "Structural failure" there is a messed up reference. Would take me a while to fix it carefully. Can you fix? Thanx

North8000 (talk) 21:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wrapping it up

Thank you for all your work on the SS Edmund Fitzgerald. If you would be so kind as to address the two remaining points: the fact that the Fitzgerald was a part of a fleet owned by Northwest, and the issue of observable damage, we can conclude the review. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 00:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I am mistaken, I believe that those are already resolved. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 01:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citation format on the Edmund Fitzgerald article

Again I feel guilty just watching you work. I'm not yet fluent on citation formatting, but would be happy to get up to speed. Also dide not want to complicate or intefere with your work. Is there still a lot of work to be done on these? Can I help?

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

North8000, please see your talk page.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 22:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Case items

It turns out while WP says to use sentence case on it's article and section titles, it says to use title case for the titles of other works per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Composition titles. So this means the titles of books, articles etc., even when the original work did not do so. Briefly, title case is capitalizing the first letter of each word except for minor words. I think we mostly follow this already. I'll start going through the whole article for this, but (if this looks OK with you) could you do this on any new items you put in? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:12, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that I instead used the style of the original work in the citations so that means more cleanup. Thank you for your help on this.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 15:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't trust my read alone on the wp:mos, but the way I read it it exactly matched what Imzaddi said North8000 (talk) 15:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I'd be happy to do it. I was mostly asking you regarding any new entries. 15:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I read the mos the same way too. I will use the title case on my next citation reformatting or citation entries.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 15:53, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Musical Tributes: SS Edmund Fitzgerald

Dear WpWatchdog (Steven J. Anderson). Two times you have deleted an entry I made regarding musical tributes to the SS Edmund Fitzgeral with our song "Shove On Fitzgerald" by the band "Wolff". You state that the "citation for this text is invalid and cannot be verified." Well, Sir, you can verify the music and entry is valid with a quick "google" search or simply visit www.cdbaby.com/wolffmusic where the song is available and you'll see that the song "Shove On Fitzgerald" is, indeed, real. You will find reference to the song on the SS Fitzgerald website too; see http://www.ssedmundfitzgerald.com/ to find reference to this song.

Please do not delete my entry on the SS Edmund Fitzgerald website; thank you for your understanding. I have added two external references which list the song. Here is the new entry:

QUOTE

In 1979, the Oregon band "WOLFF" (BMI) wrote and composed the song "Shove On Fitzgerald" in memory of the crew of the SS Edmund Fitzgerald. Previously unreleased, the song was finally released in 2002 on their album "Metanoia" (LEICO Music, Label 7701). [1]

UNQUOTE

I don't know what other information you need to consider the entry valid or verified but I assure you that the song exists and that my entry in Wikipedia is valid. I'm the founding member of the band "WOLFF" and am telling you the information is accurate. You can see the song "Shove On Fitzgerald" listed on www.cdbaby.com/wolffmusic and can listen to it if you wish. The song is a tribute to the SS Edmund Fitzgerald. The song has been used on several other websites that offer tribute to the SS Fitzgerald as well, including http://www.ssedmundfitzgerald.com/ which is a website dedicated to the SS Fitzgerald. If you have any questions, please contact me: Daniel Wolff, music (at) wolff.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.199.164.33 (talk) 22:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To Whom It May Concern: I did not delete the above. I am not Steven J. Anderson. Try contacting him. I suggest you also place the above on Talk:SS Edmund Fitzgerald where editors involved with the article will review your concerns.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 22:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See my note on main talk page regarding this. North8000 (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Steven deleted it the first time, they reinserted it WPWatchdog deleted it the second time, now its reinserted again. I'll delete it the third time and send it to talk. North8000 (talk) 23:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot that I deleted it the second time. Thank you for helping clear this up.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 23:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edmund Fitzgerald status

I finished the case check. Also tied up those three items that I raised. Making a last try for references on that TV show. I figure that we can decide once we see what we do and don't get. Other than that I think I'm done with everything that I can think of. Are you all done with the references? / need any help?. After that we need to decide whether to send it directly to FA review or to first send it to peer review. We can talk about that then. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking on the case check. I completed the citation check. I will try again for another reference for the TV show too.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 00:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I figure that in a few days we'll decide/ resolve the "Due South" at which time we won't have any remaining action items and be ready for the next step. That could be to go directly to FA review, or a generalized peer-review process, or we could ask for some one-on-one review through the peer review section. In FA, folks make comments on things that need fixing and we can just fix them. About the only down side of going directly to FA review is that if they find something that looks too huge to "just fix" they might start voting against it. I think that this article has been pretty thoroughly put through the wringer already.

I went through the FA criteria at Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria and looked at some of the reviews. About the only two "big thing" quesiton marks that come to mind are prose and reference format. I really don't know this very well.....do you understnad what they want and if we meet that? On prose, I know I wrote a lot in there, and I think I'm reasonably good at precision in writing, but I'm not so confident about the prose part. There are some folks at peer review who volunteer to review prose. I was thinking of trying to get one of them to look at the article, hopefully one who would be able to look at it relatively soon. What do you think?

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we met most of the FA criteria. I am not confident about my prose either and I was learning when I reformatted the references. We made great progress but I think the article would benefit from a peer review first.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 21:59, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll start by trying to get a prose reviewer.North8000 (talk) 22:40, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good plan. Thank you for keeping the article moving forward.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 23:24, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Will be down in central Mexico (and very busy there) until January 22. My WP presence will be less and less reliable for a week. North8000 (talk) 00:21, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I asked [[1]]. North8000 (talk) 00:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did not receive any response, even after I followed up. I'm thinking that the next thing would be to just put it fully into the peer review system. A part of that includes any requests on what especially we'd like feedback on. I'm thinking prose, reference formatting and whether or no to dump the "Due South" section due to not having a better reference. I guess that this is what we already decided, and so I'll just do it. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on all counts. Thank you.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 19:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did what that bot just did to the refs help or mess you up? If the latter, we should revert soon. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the bot did a good job cleaning up minor formatting errors in the citations. I think we should leave it. If it is wrong, an editor will surely catch it during the review process.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 00:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Great Lakes Shipwreck Museum

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edmund Fitzgerald lifeboat image

Can you explain the source of the image Edmund Fitzgerald Lifeboat? The Wikipedia Commons file credits you as the author? Clarification is needed for the license of this image for use on the SS Edmund Fitzgerald article before nominating it as a featured article. If I don't hear back from you, I can replace it with another image. Thank you in advance for any assistance you can provide.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 15:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am the author of the image. I'm not sure what clarification is needed. Asher196 (talk) 16:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is the link to the source. See the comment on Wikipedia:Peer review/SS Edmund Fitzgerald/archive1 toward the bottom of the page.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the problem occured when someone moved the file to Commons. I re-uploaded the file.Asher196 (talk) 17:37, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for promptly fixing the problem.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edmund Fitzgerald PR

You are most welcome. I added another note to the PR just now: "The |Ships note parameter in the infobox can accommodate an explanatory note for just about anything. Being sunk is an unusual "general characteristic", but maybe that is not a sticking point." I think you might put the coordinates citation in that slot if you explain that they identify the location of the wreck. Finetooth (talk) 21:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DWT/ Dead Weight Tonnage

Do you know where we can find the DWT in a source which also includes the units(which of the three kinds of "tons") and the basis of the rating? (which load line etc.) Also the time frame of the rating of it....(before or after the load lines were changed) Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was just looking for a DWT source when you left the above message. I couldn't verify DWT for the Fitzgerald from any source. I left a comment on the peer review page. Our most authoritative sources for the tonnage at the time of the sinking would probably be the Coast Guard and NTSB reports.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 23:11, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of many Barnstars due to you

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
To the human dynamo researcher and editor Wpwatchdog, for your immense work on the SS Edmund Fitzgerald article as we strive for FA and article-of-the day on the date of her sinking. Also a teamwork barnstar for being such a pleasure to work with. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:34, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How's it going?

Well, we're up for FA and things are hoppin' at the article and the FA page.

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I had to duck out the last few days due to RL. Are there any issues remaining? I can work on it tomorrow. Thank you minding the store.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 22:50, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lots. Most of it is now at the FA nomination page. Link is at the top of the article talk page but it's [[2]] nice to have you back.  :-) North8000 (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Per more detailed discussion in "notes on changes" section, we gotta be in quick action mode right now.
"This this is FAC, not PR, so quick reaction is essential. I'll try to help out in the references stuff later today................. --Rontombontom (talk) 06:44, 3 March 2011 (UTC)"
"WP, reinforcing what Ronto said on the "quick action". You've been the human dynamo on the sourcing, and came with / have have the most print sources. Can you jump on some of those detailed source question, most of them in Fife's comments? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)"
Thank you for the words of encouragement. I think I can speak for my cohorts that we very much appreciate the mentoring and help we received in our quest for FA.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 03:23, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

USCGC Hollywood (disambiguation)

Hi, I came across this article while patrolling new pages. By chance, did you mean for this page to be titled USCGC Hollyhock? —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes! Yes, I did. Do you know how to fix it? Thank you in advance for any help you can give.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 15:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I moved the article to USCGC Hollyhock (disambiguation) and I have requested deletion of the "Hollywood" title. For future reference, instructions and policy related to moving a page can be found at WP:MOVE. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
By the time I found the above instructions, you had already fixed it. Thank you so much.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 16:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paraphrasing review at the Fitz article

I was thinking/suggesting to just quickly fix any that you know of that you put in (usually by just tweaking the wording) and then to report that you think that the material that you put in is OK. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added quotes where the text ran too close to the original. I think the article has too many quotes. Please feel free to paraphrase where you think appropriate.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 00:15, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it's fine as is. I think that I started something bigger than intended. Either way, it boils down to this....Have you now fixed any close paraphrases that you are aware of? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 00:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Struck it. You're a step ahead of me. North8000 (talk) 00:52, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To tell you the truth, I feel like I've lost perspective after the thousands of edits we've been through. Thank goodness you've always been there to tie up the loose ends. I am still hoping we finally achieve our goal.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 03:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's been a long road! ~7 months feels like 7 years. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Templates at SS Fitzgerald

I was asking North8000 (talk · contribs) (specifically offering to do it myself, to be precise) about possibly applying the {{harv}}/{{sfn}} series of templates to SS Edmund Fitzgerald to simplify the cross-referencing in the article, and he(?) recommended I ask you as you're the one who worked those out manually and he is concerned "that this doesn't make it so abstract that you would have a hard time working with them." What's your take on it? Circéus (talk) 04:26, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be good to simplify cross-referencing in the article so please do apply the templates. Thank you for your help.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 12:00, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll get to it sometimes this week then. Circéus (talk) 16:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Achievement of Featured Article status for SS Edmund Fitzgerald article

Congratulations! What an immense amount of thorough work you have done on this article! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:49, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You were the key. I would have abandoned the FA goal without you. It was a pleasure working with you.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 21:23, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ships barnstar

WikiProject Ships Barnstar
For all of your hard work in getting SS Edmund Fitzgerald promoted to Featured Article. Brad (talk) 03:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Coal fire

Sorry that I did not notice that that was new work and your work. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I don't really have a dog in the fight. I just noticed there was ongoing discussion about the coal fire in various books when I was tracking down a higher quality source to cite it. Old Mooonraker (who is the top contributor to the article) says it's a red herring so let's take it out. I'm for taking out the mummy curse too.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 18:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Main page appearance: SS Edmund Fitzgerald

This is a note to let the main editors of SS Edmund Fitzgerald know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 10, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 10, 2011. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The SS Edmund Fitzgerald was a 729-foot (222 m) Great Lakes freighter that made headlines after sinking in Lake Superior in a massive storm on November 10, 1975 with near hurricane-force winds and 35-foot (11 m) waves. The Fitzgerald suddenly sank approximately 17 miles (27 km) from the entrance to Whitefish Bay, at a depth of 530 feet (160 m). Her crew of 29 perished without sending any distress signals, and no bodies were recovered; she is the largest boat to have sunk in the Great Lakes. The Fitzgerald carried taconite from mines near Duluth, Minnesota, to iron works in Detroit, Toledo and other ports. Her size, record-breaking performance, and "dee jay captain" endeared the Fitzgerald to boat watchers. Many theories, books, studies and expeditions have examined the cause of the sinking. Her sinking is one of the most well-known disasters in the history of Great Lakes shipping and is the subject of Gordon Lightfoot's 1976 hit song, "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald". (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 00:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, WPwatchdog, we did it! What an immense amount of excellent work you did on this, and what a pleasure you have been to work with on this! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 03:09, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to SS Daniel J. Morrell, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This was an attack. I would expect better from a user that has received barnasters. Please refrain from vandalism and attacks in the future. Cheers! Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 01:14, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ramaksoud2000 you should have looked closer or inquired (or at least read their edit summary) before you insulted an editor who is above reproach. Took me 30 seconds to figure out what I think happened. A vandal self-reverted and WPwatchdog accidentally reverted the revert when trying to revert the vandal. North8000 (talk) 01:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, North8000. You are right. I didn't realize I was reverting the revert.
My apologies. Please ignore the warning above. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 16:02, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help me

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, please place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page.

Does the autobiography Joseph B. MacInnis meet the criteria for speedy deletion? If so, would it be considered promotional? --Wpwatchdog (talk) 11:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether Gildir is the subject of the article. Did you mean "the biography Joseph B. MacInnis"?
In which case WP:BIO presents the basic inclusion criteria in WP:BASIC (subsection of bio). "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." The article in question does cite various sources, therefore i would propose deletion or nominate for deletion but not start a speedy deletion process. Also, you can take this issue up with the primary contributor, Gildir, or discuss it on the article's talk page. Cheers, benzband (talk) 12:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your question on my talk page, Wpwatchdog, I have no relationship with MacInnis whatsoever. Joseph B. MacInnis is one of a long series of articles I have been writing on aquanauts and people connected to underwater diving. Gildir (talk) 14:18, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for letting me know. He is definitely notable in the underwater diving world.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 13:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Downbound

The article Downbound has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article appears to consist of 2 possibly contradictory, US-specific dictionary definitions. Not a subject for an encyclopedia.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DexDor (talk) 20:40, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Linsey Alexander

Wpwatchdog, I've put a speedy tag on this article, since it doesn't have any RS or indication of why the subject is notable. Just FYI. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please hold off the deletion. As you can see, there are many RS and this is a notable Chicago blues musician. I will return in a few days to complete the article.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 01:57, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I don't think there's much chance anyone is going to delete it anytime in the near future! ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 06:22, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!
Hi Wpwatchdog! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 20:31, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Holle Thee Maxwell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to God Bless the Child, Pop and Jimmy Smith
Paul Robeson High School (Chicago) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Pop

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Quint Studer may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Studers donated $1 million to the University of Wisconsin at Whitewater in 2012.<ref name="U of W">[http://philanthropy.com/factfile/gifts/18?order=GiftValue&direction=asc America's Top Donars} - The Chronicle of Philanthropy, 2014</ref> Studer donated $2.25 million to the [[maritime museum]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:41, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Harmonica Hinds was accepted

Harmonica Hinds, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

 SAMI  talk 14:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Quint Studer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fast Company. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


The Signpost: 15 July 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 August 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 September 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elcor, Minnesota

Hello, Wpwatchdog! I figured my edit of SS Edmund Fitzgerald would probably be deleted since I knew it wasn't directly relevant to the article, but I figured it couldn't hurt since it details something unique about that particular memorial. And while I have not edited the page Split Rock Lighthouse, it can be cited (here's a link: http://www.exploreminnesota.com/events/15938/edmund-fitzgerald-memorial-beacon-lighting). Anyway, in looking at your user page, I found that you have an interest in ghost towns and have worked to promote several pages to good article and feature article status. I have been working several years laboriously on the article Elcor, Minnesota and currently have it nominated for GA review. Comments from Peer Review have indicated that this article is appropriate for direct nomination to GA status, and FA status in the future. Would you take a look, start the review, and help the promotion? I would really like to start expanding some other pages (Manganese, Minnesota and Withrow, Minnesota are next on my list). Thanks! DrGregMN (talk) 20:48, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DrGregMN. You sure put lots of work into the Elcor article. I see that you did the vast majority of work on it. I don't have the time right now to work on the article but I did submit a request for copy editing [3] that is sometimes painful but always helpful. Good luck with the process.Wpwatchdog (talk) 16:07, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This copy-edit is done. Let me know if you have any questions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:40, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 September 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 November 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Wpwatchdog. 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]

The Signpost: 18 December 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 February 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:49, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:50, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 May 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 June 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 July 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 October 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 October 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:11, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Wpwatchdog. 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]

The Signpost: 1 December 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:48, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Wpwatchdog, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,
7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:56, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

The Signpost: 31 January 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:51, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 March 2019

News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

The Signpost: 30 April 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 May 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:53, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 July 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 August 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:42, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 September 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 October 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:12, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 December 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 January 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 March 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ "SS Edmund Fitzgerald". and "CDBaby Track 19".