User talk:Dudemanfellabra/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Dudemanfellabra, for the period March 2008 through February 2009. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Archives

Archive 1 (Mar 2008 - Feb 2009) Archive 2 (Mar 2009 - Feb 2010) Archive 3 (Mar 2010 - Feb 2011) Archive 4 (Mar 2011 - Feb 2012) Archive 5 (Mar 2012 - Feb 2013) Archive 6 (Mar 2013 - Feb 2014) Archive 7 (Mar 2014 - Feb 2015) Archive 8 (Mar 2015 - Feb 2016)

Thanks for picture of Highland Park Dentzel Carousel

Hi Dudemanfellabra -- Nice pics! And thank you for posting your pictures of Highland Park Dentzel Carousel and inserting one into the List of National Historic Landmarks in Mississippi‎. I had contributed to that List article and have it on my watch list still, so I noticed the addition. I see you took pics of both the carousel building and the carousel itself, and chose to post the building pic to the List of NHLs. I am not sure if the NHL is about the carousel alone or about both the building and carousel together.

By the way, I took pictures recently of a historic carousel in Santa Barbara, California, that I have yet to upload.

It sure would be nice if you would go around and take pictures of other sites on that list! Anyhow, thank you for making the contribution. doncram (talk) 20:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the "Carousel" section of the Wiki article entitled "Highland Park Dentzel Carousel and Shelter Building," the intro says that both the carousel and its building are national historic landmarks. That sentence itself isn't given a reference, but the [ref tag] links to a pdf that explains that they are both, in fact, National Historic Landmarks.

The pictures I've taken and uploaded have been confined to Meridian, MS (I live there), so if it's not in Meridian, I haven't taken a picture of it. I do have quite a few historic pictures from the city (about 20), so if they're needed anywhere, let me know. The pictures include all of the pictures on the Highland Park, Meridian Union Station, The Carousel, and the Meridian, MS page itself. I've also taken a picture of Peavey Electronics headquarters, The Meridian Museum of Art and Meridian Community College. Dudemanfellabra (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. Got your message. I've put this Talk page on my Watch list, at least for a while, so I will see any further discussion here. Thanks, yes, I see that the National Historic Landmark does include both the shelter building and the carousel. I see also that it was I who started up the Highland Park Dentzel Carousel article, with the generic NHL and NRHP documents that are available. I am so glad to see that you have developed it, with good writing in addition to adding the pictures. So further, I was inspired just now to create an article on Spencer Park Dentzel Carousel, which you refer to in the Highland Park article, with the same type of NHL and NRHP sources. Can you please take a look at that? And if you don't mind, I may make one or two minor edits to the Highland Park article now. doncram (talk) 21:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Woo! New article haha. I haven't personally made any new articles yet; I just joined Wikipedia about a week ago. I've been primarily focusing on the stub articles around Meridian, but I'll work on the Spencer Park page shortly. I have to go to church in a few hours, and I don't want to start without finishing, so I'll just wait until later tonight or tomorrow to find information.

Sure, do all the editing you want to the Highland Park Dentzel Carousel page. Isn't that what makes this Wikipedia? :P Dudemanfellabra (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay, well welcome to wikipedia then. :) You've certainly made a great start. You'd be very much welcomed if you care to join WP:NRHP and create new articles for any of the 43 or so Registered Historic Places in Meridian, MS, see them listed within List of Registered Historic Places in Mississippi#Lauderdale County. Most are "red-links". You can start an article by clicking on the red-link. If you have any questions like "How can i easily obtain one of those NRHP infoboxes filled out with facts already?" (simple answer: visit the Elkman NRHP infobox generator), please feel free to post in the Talk page of the WP:NRHP. If you do create a new article, please feel free to mention that in the Talk page there, and/or announce it in the list of newly created articles within the main page of WP:NRHP.

I did add a little to the Highland Park article, including linking to the Spencer Park one, and also linking to yet another new article covering the 3rd Dentzel carousel, the one at the Children's Museum in Indianapolis.

Also, by the way, it is the Allan Herschell 3-Abreast Carousel in Santa Barbara that I took pics of recently, and have yet to upload. I just created the article stub with an NRHP infobox and not much more. And now I'm done with carousels for today. Cheers, doncram (talk) 21:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Saw u upgraded rating of Highland Park Dentzel Carousel to Start. Clearly it merits that at least. Hey, i don't have other Meridian NRHPs on my watch list, so don't know if u've posted more. Do say so by announcing new articles at WP:NRHP. cheers, doncram (talk) 02:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

How might I go about doing that? I've actually added two more besides that I think: Grand Opera House (Meridian, Mississippi) and Threefoot Building. I've expanded as much as I know on the Opera house, but I haven't gotten around to expanding the Threefoot building. I have images of both though. I actually have been editing a bunch of articles around Meridian. I plan to picture/create all the articles in the Lauderdale County section and possibly create a few more about certain places in/around Meridian. Dudemanfellabra (talk) 02:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

What i mean by announcing a new article at WP:NRHP is going to Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#New articles and pictures, finding the "edit" button in the New Articles list, and adding a wikilink to your new article. There's no guarantee that you will get feedback on articles that you announce there, but other NRHP members do monitor the announcements there. doncram (talk) 03:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

NRHP Query Error (of location coordinates)

Got your question on my Talk page. Yes, you are correct that the coordinates coming from the National Register Information System (NRIS), through the Elkman NRHP infobox generator, or through any other query system, often are off. It's a database of old information, before people had GPS. For many purposes, like for plotting a map at the level of a state, the NRIS coordinates are still okay. It is our policy that you should correct them, if you have better information. However, I am not the one to ask, about how to do measurements and corrections most efficiently. I do know that there are tools like you want, which would extract from a google map the coordinate coding to paste into an article, say. But I haven't bothered with coordinates. There are others who are expert. Could you post your same question over on the Talk page of WP:NRHP? Your google map showing the difference between NRIS and true data is very clever, people will get a kick out of it, I think. :) I'll participate in the discussion over there, if I can help. doncram (talk) 04:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Meridian MRA document available

Hi, I notice that the NRHP infobox of your nice new article, Grand Opera House (Meridian, Mississippi), mentions a Meridian MRA. MRA stands for multiple resource assessment or something like that. Here is the link to the PDF file of this 28 page report. It may be a good source for some info to add to the Opera house article and/or to other Meridian MS articles. Hope this helps. doncram (talk) 04:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow. How do you know how to find this stuff? Haha I had no clue what an MRA was; it just showed up with the infobox. That PDF is great. I can probably use it for a LOT of articles haha. Thanks for that! Hey, I'm not sure if you would know, but no one is responding to my question haha, and you're the first person that's said anything to me since I've asked. I asked this question. Think you can help? Dudemanfellabra (talk) 04:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, good, I didn't know whether you had this already or not, and I am glad you find it helpful.  :) I saw mention of the MRA in the Grand Opera House infobox, and I knew to look for it at [http://www.nps.gov/nr/research/index.htm this National Register search site, just scroll down to "Search Multiple Property submissions", go in and browse in your state. The national NPS sites tend to have available scanned versions of all NRHPs that are also National Historic Landmarks, and also all multiple property submissions. They don't have scanned versions of NRHP nomination/registration documents that exist for all other NRHP sites. There would be a separate document for Temple Theatre, because it is a separately listed NRHP site with a separate number. It is not merely one of the many properties included in the Meridian MRA (although it apparently is covered by that), it is a separately listed NRHP site with a separate refnum number, hence a separate document. So, to work on an article like Temple Theatre, you should just put in a request to get a free hard copy of the NRHP documents sent to you by postal mail. Email your request, providing your postal mail address, to the National Register Reference Team, they are at nr_reference (at) nps.gov. I noticed also that you joined the WP:NRHP by signing up on its main page. Great, glad to have u officially on board! I'll look over at the Dunn's Fall's article to see your question there, too. Cheers, doncram (talk) 04:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so did I mess up by linking the Threefoot Building article to the same MRA as the Grand Opera House (Meridian, Mississippi) article? Should I link the Temple Theater article to it as well? I get what you're saying about separate individual documents, but I'm not clear on this; tell me if I'm right: Each NRHP has its own document even if it is submitted with an MRA. The MRA is just a document telling about a larger area with many NRHPs. Right?

So if that's right, Technically I could link all the NRHPs in Meridian to that one MRA (if they had the MRA in the infobox), but I would still be missing the document for that specific NRHP, which I could obtain by snail mail.

Any of this right haha? Thanks :D -Dudemanfellabra (talk) 15:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I think the Opera house, listed on the National Register on 27 December 1972, is part of the MRA and it is listed in the Elkman output as Meridian MRA (AD), whatever that means. The Temple Theater (Meridian, Mississippi) and the Threefoot Building were listed on December 18, 1979, and therefore would seem to me not to be on that same MRA. Everything in the same MRA / MPS would get the same date: it is the point, they are all being done together. But Threefoot and Temple Theater has a note of being on a Meridian MRA, too, with no (AD) appended. I don't know what is going on really. Oh, the Meridian MRA document, although it is one PDF file, is in 2 or 3 parts, reflecting an original and one or two additional batches, that is what is going on.

Usually, I believe that there is one huge set of documentation all together at one moment, when they approve the whole thing. And yes, I believe that the multipage MRA document is an overview, and that there may exist a separate NRHP Inventory/Nomination document for each of the separate REFNUMs that it covers. I don't know that there is a separate document for each one, for sure: it may be that for some MRA's there is, and for some MRA's there is not. Partly this could be a matter of some staff person at the National Park Service making a decision whether to cut up the huge documentation into one overview plus separate pieces for each one, or whether to keep it all together. This may vary according to the specifics of each MRA.

So, I guess I advise asking for separate documents for each one. Acknowledge in your email request to the National Register what you do have, ask for separate documents if they exist (which I think they do). doncram (talk) 17:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so I'll ask for all the documents for each individual NRHP, but for right now, should I leave the links to that one MRA to the Threefoot Building article since it seems that it was submitted under a different MRA? Or is that MRA a combination of all of them? --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 17:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Leaving the link to the same MRA PDF document is okay. I assume it is covered by one of the additions/increases to the original MRA, and hence covered in one of the later sections of the MRA combined PDF document, although i did not notice it specifically. And the NRIS system indicates it is part of the Meridian MRA, and there is only one Meridian MRA PDF document. doncram (talk) 21:47, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Loeb's Department Store

Hi Dudemanfellabra, I know that you inted to do good things by updating the Loeb's page, but you have no idea what you are talking about. Please stop editing the Loeb's page. The Alex Loeb that you are refering to as a painter is still living, and did not start the current Loeb's store. He is a famous painter by hobby, and is 89 years old today and married to Jean Loeb. The current Loeb's building is not the building that you claim to be the Alex Loeb building either. The Alex Loeb building that you are refering to is downtown, across the street from UBS. The current building is owned by Robert Loeb Jr, son of Robert Loeb Sr., who once owned Marks-Rothenberg department store.

Finally, STOP EDITING THIS PAGE unless you know what you are talking about.

Thank you, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willwl123 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Disfranchisement after the Civil War

Hi and thanks a lot for cleaning up my first attempt at tables here! Much better! I knew they needed help, but got bogged down in the directions. Had been mostly working at writing. What did you use for total percentage of population, an average of the proportions? I was going to go back to my original material to figure it out in relation to total population of each state, but was conveniently finding other things to do. It's not so difficult, just time.--Parkwells (talk) 20:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I made a reference explaining how I did the math. I just used the information that was already there.. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 20:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again!--Parkwells (talk) 22:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Links

External links are largely misunderstood, as you note they are often incorrectly used as a shortcut to creating articles, to link a specific site from a general topic, or to introduce less-than-notable entities into WP. I may have overlooked the other links as they were associated with bluelinked articles, but a red/non-link plus an external link about a school, band, person etc. is a bit of a red flag. I know there are tons of these links on WP, but that doesn' mean they shouldnt be cleaned up or highlighted when they are found. Nice work with the refs on the non-lnked individuals. Deiz talk 22:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Geo coords for Carter Hall

Hi Dudeman -- Could you do me a favor and add coordinates for Carter Hall (Millwood, Virginia) into its NRHP infobox? I would like for the Virginia map to show in the infobox, and I want to nominate this for a DYK. I just created the article.

Here is where i think it is located, on a Google map (found by searching for Carter Hall, VA and then moving the pointer somewhat): Google Maps

It would be great if you could help. If not convenient, that's okay too. Thanks, doncram (talk) 19:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The coordinates are now added. I moved the pointer to the location of the house itself instead of where you had it. If I may ask, why don't you want the picture of the estate in the infobox? --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 20:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I like the map in the infobox, and pics can go anywhere. For a place like this, few would know where it is located, so a map is usefully informative, unlike say a map showing where New York City is. And the location of Stonewall Jackson's headquarters is helpful in relating to where he was leading in the Civil War. This turns out to be further north than i had guessed it would be. Others seem to dislike the maps and move pictures from outside inside of the infobox, that's an editorial decision i guess. Thanks again, i was juggling a lot of things and it is really nice to have this taken care of, it would have taken me quite a while to figure it out. doncram (talk) 00:30, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem haha. I just thought of something: Isn't it possible to modify the {{infobox nrhp}} template to include both a map AND a picture? I've actually thought of this before and wondered why when a picture is added the template takes the map away. Wouldn't it be more helpful to include both in the infobox? --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 00:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Great point. It should be more left to editor discretion. I would sometimes like to have pic and a map in the infobox. I have noticed, there is one version of NRHP infobox that does it, but also adds some red stars that i don't particularly like. For whatever reason, this version has been used in a bunch of Texas articles that i have noticed, but not elsewhere as far as i know. Here's an example, U-Drop Inn. Perhaps it could be fixed up, and/or adapted so that we have more options as editors. Would you like to raise this on the WP:NRHP talk page? doncram (talk) 01:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I actually just played around with the code for {{infobox nrhp}} and found out how to make the infobox display both if they're available. If one isn't available, it doesn't display it. Also, if neither is available, neither is displayed. I didn't want to save it without notifying/asking everyone else, but here is the code I came up with and it's output on the right:

Code removed. Final version can be found at Template:Infobox nrhp2.

This addition to the template forces both images to show while the old one would only show one or the other. I haven't actually tried this on an article yet because I didn't want to save it, but theoretically it will work. The only difference from the user's point of view is a new input, map_caption, needed to differentiate from the caption input for the main image. What do you think? --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 02:14, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Carter Hall DYK

On 22 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Carter Hall (Millwood, Virginia), which you helped on by providing coordinates, thanks! If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks, and check it out on the main page! doncram (talk) 03:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

186th ARW

Thanks for the links. I tried to get as much onto the page like the basic information but I also tried not to sound like I was plagarizing the entire thing. I actually used the links to put in a majority of what you see on that page. Kevin Rutherford 18:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

NRHP2 infobox

Hi, yes, about using NRHP2 on William Howard Taft National Historic Site. I am just getting into gear to revisit the 391 U.S. National Park Service-administered areas, which include all of the NMON, NMEM, NHS etc categories. These are where the NRHP2 infobox is most useful. See and feel free to join in discussion over at Talk page of wp:PAREAS, where i have been explaining what i want to do. Basically, i want to do some using the NRHP2 template and get feedback on how it looks and so on. And as i/we create some, we can identify any problems with NRHP2 now. It worked great for William Howard Taft NHS though, thanks! doncram (talk) 01:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Question: Does the format for use of NRHP2 have to differ in the upfront identification of which colorbars to use? Could it be done in a backwards compatible way, taking multiple arguments for the nrhptype field, as in nrhptype = blank or nrhp to denote NRHP only, nrhptype = NHL to indicate NHL as well, nrhptype = NHL NHS to denote the situation for William Howard Taft NHS. Instead of no nrhptype but, nhl = yes and nhs = yes. doncram (talk) 02:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Eh.. well if I could code the box in like C++ or some other language, then yea haha.. I haven't really spent much time figuring out how wikicode works, but I definitely know that the multiple input thing won't work. I would need an InString() command along with commands to manipulate a string to find spaces/commas to separate the nrhp_type parameter inputs. The closest thing I could get to what you're talking about is "nrhp_type = type1", "nrhp_type2 = type2", etc. I would have to completely alter the code to include a subfunction or something haha..... if that is even possible. The template would run the subfunction for each nrhp type and return the bar color. Haha it would be complicated, but it could be done.

The main issue I have with doing this (though the transition would be slightly easier) would be the subfunction thing. I would like to keep the template all in one section if at all possible. Having one block of code to edit makes the debugging process a LOT easier. If something goes wrong, you don't have to go looking through 9 million subpages to find the problem - it's right in front of you in the main code.

Also, backwards-compatibility isn't that critical. We're simply changing to a new infobox; if we were updating the code in the existing nrhp infobox, backwards-compatibility would be much more critical. Everything in the new infobox is backwards-compatible anyways except for two inputs: nrhp_type and designated. Since we're changing to a completely separate set of code, you have to edit each individual article anyways, so just changing nrhp_type = nhl to nhl = yes and designated = January 1, 2000 to designated_nhl = January 1, 2000 isn't that much more work. Like you mentioned before, if we could get a bot to do it, it would just be that much easier. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 02:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Quick question: how can I turn the map off? E.g. in this version of Jefferson Memorial, where i just replaced a Protected areas infobox by the NRHP2 one. I want to leave the coordinates in, but not display the map, to be more compatible to previous appearance.

Also, i visited Jefferson Memorial article just now because i noticed it on recent contribution lists of User:Wikid77, the October 2007 author of the "Infobox nrhp map" template. I would like to invite his/her comments on NRHP2. Does NRHP2 subsume all features of that other template? Not exactly. One advantage for some articles of the other template is that it allows the map to display last, in Image / info / map order, rather than in NRHP2 order of image / map / info. I am finding in some articles, especially for long/tall maps like state of California one, that I would prefer for the map to be below the factual info. I am guessing that allowing change of order in NRHP2 would not be too hard. Not sure how many order options should be offered. If only one order is to be offered, I would lean towards image / info / map order. doncram (talk) 10:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I just turned the map off on the Jefferson Memorial article. To do this, simply leave the locmapin parameter blank. The coordinates still show, though.

I'll look into the order thing.. it's actually a little harder than you'd think haha.. I'd have to make a new parameter like map_location or something with valid options "top" and "bottom" with top displaying below the main image and bottom displaying at the bottom of the infobox. I'd have to have an if/or thing to determine what to display in what position. Not EXTREMELY hard... but it's kind of tough haha. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 16:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure, i/we all might always prefer the image, info, map order, if both map and image are present. In which case making a new parameter would not be necessary. As you may have noticed I have been creating articles using NRHP2. I am figuring that after I create a few more examples in the more unusual types, like NMPs etc., that I would ask for comments at Talk of NRHP, about how the collection is looking. On this point it may be that consensus is just to provide one order. But on the other hand, well, if it is easy to offer various orders, allowing info first say, then maybe that would be the way to go.

By the way, have you looked at how infoboxes for ships are created? At WP:SHIPS, they had an old version of infobox that has been gradually replaced by a more modular one. Maybe there is some programming info in how they did that, that might be interesting or helpful here. FYI, compare the infobox coding in this old example of Ingham using old ship infobox format vs. recent example of Ingham using new modular infobox format. Note also that the former version had a separate following NRHP infobox while the newer version incorporates the NRHP infobox into the ship infobox. doncram (talk) 22:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I think I'm going to wait until I get a consensus to see if I should add the order thing in.. the code would be very messy and hard to understand. Same story with the locmapin parameter.

I have also looked at the WP:SHIPS example.. the main issue I have with this is that it requires several templates (one of the reasons I don't like the current nrhp infobox). I think that all the information for the infobox should be contained in one template to better simplify editing/debugging.--Dudemanfellabra (talk)

Meridian Downtown Historic District

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Meridian Downtown Historic District, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.meridianms.org/com_historicneighbor.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Meridian, Mississippi#Historic Districts in Meridian

Heh heh :) . I am very pleased with your ocd response. :) I was just messing with you, for the hell of it.  :) doncram (talk) 16:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Meridian, Mississippi

Sorry about the Civil Rights section - was juggling other articles and didn't get all the sources copied over, but will fix it. Also was not intending to get into so much; don't want it to take over the article, so will try to reduce material. Certainly the murders are covered in detail elsewhere.--Parkwells (talk) 17:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

• I ran the semi-automated peer review script on the article and pasted it in the article's talk page. I will add it to my list to look at, but it may take me several days as the backlog at PR is quite large. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I thought the article got improved before/during the peer review, though i have not revisited the peer review to see if everything was addressed. Is there any reason not to put it up for Good Article now? Having had a peer review done, especially with Ruhrfisch involved, if you have responded to most/all of the comments, constitutes a lot toward getting GA status. I think this is / has been a really very nice article for a city of its size, or larger. doncram (talk) 23:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well I was going to wait to put it up for GA until all the objectives in this section are completed. I've kind of been slacking over the past few weeks as I've been distracted with work and other things, but I plan to work on them more later. I recently added {{expand}} templates to sections that I think need expanding, so maybe someone in the community will help out.. If you think you might want to help out, the improvements are all outlined haha. You could even chime in with some more if you'd like :D. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 05:51, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Got your message. Glad you were able to find a source for the exact boundaries. Wow, the revised Meridian, MS Historic Districts image looks great. It works really well in the article, with the numbering and color coding. Really great, well done! I appreciate very much that you persisted through with this.

On another front, by the way, i am somewhat surprised but the Ole Miss buildings seem not to have become NHLs. Just not their time yet, no doubt for political reasons. Only one of the 11 proposed NHLs was accepted so far. Nice to hear from you. I don't generally like to ask or share about private stuff on these talk pages, but feel free to drop me an email (there's an email-to-me box at my userpage). Cheers, doncram (talk) 21:32, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Well done

		The Mississippi Barnstar
		I hereby award you the The Mississippi Barnstar for your hard work and much needed improvement of Meridian, Mississippi, an article within the scope of WikiProject Mississippi. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 09:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

nrhp2

I left a comment on the talk page of {{Infobox_nrhp2}}.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I have only converted Rookery Building, Roanoke Building and Chicago Board of Trade Building.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

After the code is changed at nrhp2, can't you just make a redirect so that you don't have to change the nrhp3 articles?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I will only have three articles to worry about for now so just let me know what I have to do and when.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

In the long run, if you want to know what articles I will be changing you can start at User:TonyTheTiger/Table. Click the NRHP tab twice to sort for my NRHPs. I don't think I have any NRHPs I have worked on extensively without getting them promoted to WP:GA. So all of my big concerns are there.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I have finished converting my NRHPs even the ones I did not work on extensively (which I seem to forget about at times).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

a bug has been noted at Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/NRHP2 February 2008 merger worklist doncram (talk) 19:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

nrhp3 / nrhp2

Per your request, I visited all the LAHCM articles and converted from "lahcm = yes" format to having them use NRHP3 and "designated_other2_name = L.A. Historic-Cultural Monument" etc. format. So it is ready for you to proceed with folding the "Other" type features into NRHP2, and dropping NRHP3. Let me know if you want any help, i would be happy to visit these pages again and switch calls from NRHP3 to NRHP2, for example. doncram (talk) 21:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Fourth of July, or bust, Thanks!

		The Fourth of July, or bust, Barnstar
		I award you this Barnstar for your solid, witty, creative, supportive, learned, timely, cheerful, eloquent, and/or otherwise generally great contributions on U. S. National Historic Landmarks' articles. Yippee o yay, we pretty much met our goal of a well-started article for each of 2,442 NHLs by today! Thanks, and have a great Fourth of July! -- Doncram, 4 July 2008

Thank you specifically for your development of the NRHP2 infobox template, which has enabled compact treatment of summary information in, by now, probably hundreds of NHL articles. By the way, NRHP2 has been surprisingly helpful, during the June 11 - July 4 cleanup drive, in our addressing obscure NHLs in overseas places, see List of NHLs in Other. For those NHLs, NRHP infobox fails abjectly, trying to plot places on a continental USA map. Your timely and effective development and support of the NRHP2 template is greatly appreciated! With it, and some other efforts, we now have an article for each of 2,442 NHLs.... Thanks. doncram (talk) 20:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

new MS nhl pending

Hi Dudemanfellabra, I wonder if you would like to contribute to, or take the lead on developing, an article about a pending National Historic Landmark of a historic district in Oxford, MS, largely to commemorate the desegregation struggle. The NHL is proposed, and along with a batch of 16 others, might be approved and announced any day now. It's a big deal and will be in the news. There have not been any new NHLs announced, in like forever, not since i got really involved in wikipedia, actually.

I also just mentioned this to Parkwells who developed the Oxford, Missisippi article and who i've seen contributing at Meridian, Mississippi, too.

A first stub draft is here: Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/NHLsandbox12, including a link to the NHL nomination which has a wealth of information to draw upon. Hope you might be interested! doncram (talk) 22:07, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

OMG, thanks for responding so quickly, developing it and adding a pic. I do hope you may be interested in developing it more. I don't know if you have had the experience of submitting DYK's before, but perhaps you may enjoy it if you have not. It is kinda fun to get exposure on the front page of Wikipedia, and you can see strikingly how many visits to the article there are numerically by a tool available somewhere, and also by the edits and comments on an article. You have to develop or expand an article to have text of 1500 characters, and submit an interesting "hook" for it while it is less than 5 days old, counting from when it comes out of a sandbox. I would be very happy if you chose to develop this to be DYK eligible and to submit it once the NHL is announced and you/we move it into mainspace, and for you to get a DYK plaque award. Cheers, doncram (talk) 23:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

NRHP2 vs. NRHP3

Noted; I'll use NRHP2. Btw, I'm a "she" :) --Rosiestep (talk) 18:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL -- no worries. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Main page redesign

Hello, Dudemanfellabra! Wikipedia:2008 main page redesign proposal was recently cleared of all design entries. You may want to re-enter your design(s), based on the details here. (You can see the old list of designs here). NOTE: A survey was conducted on what users wanted to see in the new main page, you can see the results here. NickPenguin_(contribs) 02:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

The discussion is mainly centered around a relatively small group of editors, which makes different points of view difficult. I understand that you haven't been a part of much of the discussion on the project page, but I'm looking froward to see your views. ChyranandChloe (talk) 22:09, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 Main Page Redesign POTD

I've updated the POTD to allow a panorama to take up the horizontal space of the entire column rather than the specified width of 350 pixels. The reason why I originally had it at 350 pixels was that it would push on the sides of the tables causing it to stretch the page horizontally.

Currently if the POTD became a panorama, your proposal's POTD will stetch the page. There are two solution: switch the proposal to only CSS, or load the older POTD template. You can find the older POTD template here (copy and paste the code). I hope this helps. ChyranandChloe (talk) 03:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Switching to CSS isn't that difficult, you can use either mine, Pretzels, or some other method. Since both our designs are remarkably similar, switch your tables to floating divs

<div style="clear:left; float:left; width:60%;">

and so on. The next step is to organize each section into its own logical divide, for example, your header and content for the FA should each be in its own divider, which in turn is contained in another divider. This is usually something you do rather than talk about, if you have coding trouble just ask (you can use the methods above as an example). ChyranandChloe (talk) 04:19, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

mississippi NHL declared!

See my notice about 16 new NHLs, at wp:NRHP. Hopefully you and parkwells can revisit the Lyceum article and it can be put up for DYK, for dual credit? It's probably the best developed of all the proposed NHL articles in sandboxes. doncram (talk) 05:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Straw poll

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll in selecting five proposals before an RFC in which it will be against the current main page. You're input would be appreciated. ChyranandChloe (talk) 03:44, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

• Hey Dudemanfellabra, thanks for pointing out the image overflow problem. I think I've fixed it, I'd be immensely grateful if you could check on your end and let me know. Thanks, Pretzels^Talk! 17:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks! How about that? Pretzels^Talk! 19:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Ah, thanks for pointing that out! I guess the guys at common.css went through with it this time. Must go and thank them. Yes, the fix for the image overflow caused a huuuuge margin in Google Chrome, which seemed like a bigger problem. I am going to be trying out some changes to the design tonight and will hopefully stumble on a fix. Thanks for watching Dude! Pretzels^Talk! 23:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Lyceum-The Circle Historic District

On 25 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lyceum-The Circle Historic District, 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.

Thank you for your contributions! - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 04:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Dudemanfellabra/Sandbox2

Dudemanfellabra - I made a small edit to the code for blocking the H1 and slogan etc on your proposal. I admire your idea, I hadn't thought of doing this. I changed the technique from negative margins to relative position, because in FF3 "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" was showing over your header. With position:relative, we can add a z-index parameter which sets your content to show on top of everything else. Hope you don't mind! Pretzels^Talk! 22:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah nice.. I knew it was showing through, but that's the only way I could think of to put it at the top. Thank you for the edit; it looks much better now! I'm not sure exactly what the z-index parameter does, though; can you explain? --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 22:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, only just spotted your reply! The z-index parameter governs in what order things appear on the z axis; eg in front and behind of each other. It only works on elements that have been absolutely or relatively positioned. Pretzels^Talk! 20:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

MPRP Archiving

Thanks a lot for archiving some of the GA section in the discussions; I almost felt like I was the only one holding that up. In the next MPRP I think it would be a good idea to figure out how manage our massive discussions. ChyranandChloe (talk) 05:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

MPRP policy agenda update

I think the discussions are finally stabilizing and the next step would be the recolouring of the featured content sections. This is the point where we'd switch to from tables to CSS and the implementation of our new POTD template. Aside from all of that, the MPRP feels very elitist, that is very few people are able to grapple onto the discussion—which is something I think we need to discuss when we begin the essay on how to run MPRPs. Perhaps David can shed some light, but my point of discussion is: do you have any thoughts? ChyranandChloe (talk) 04:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

There are still a few conversations going on. The header and sister projects are winding down, and those were the main ones, but the unresolved conversations about the "Other areas of Wikipedia"/"About Wikipedia" section have seemingly died. I think these need to be resolved before starting to talk about coloring etc. since this is dealing with the contents of an entire section of the page and not just its aesthetic values. Once we get that sorted out, we can begin to talk about switching over to CSS.. then about implementing the Featured Media template (no one has even suggested moving POTD up to a single column yet, and I don't think we should until we CSS-ize the page). About Wikipedia, CSS, and POTD are all still dealing with contents; after we finish these discussions, we can talk about colors, etc.

About the conversation, I don't think it's elitist at all. People that are going to be redesigning the main page of a website so large as Wikipedia should probably know what they're talking about. If they can't keep up with the code lingo, they probably don't know enough to seriously talk about if and how to redesign a page. I, myself, have had no problem understanding the conversations (although there have been a few miscommunications), and I see it in no way to be elitist. I do think, however, that there aren't that many people involved for this to be such a big change. In the early stages (competition), we had 50+ people with their individual ideas and designs; now we're down to only a handful - no more than 6 or 7. This decline is due largely to the fact that the initial system (competition) was flawed, and that's the only time we ever put a watchlist notice out. If we had begun with the collaboration system and put out the watchlist notice, IMO we would have many more editors sticking around to participate in the discussions. So in essence, in the essay, we need to lay out the strategy as collaborative instead of competitive. The watchlist notification is still the best way of attracting interested editors, so with a collaborative strategy and watchlist notification, the next redesign will start off on a better foot than this one did. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 04:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I really didn't mean to set David off when I made the revert. But I think you handled it very well; keeping the MPRP together is more important to the project as a whole than, that is in my opinion, in perfecting the elements under the constraints we specified early on. His comments still bother me though, as in addition to disagreeing we are becoming disagreeable. ChyranandChloe (talk) 01:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I think we're getting close to the end, and that we're finishing the remaining issues on our agenda; but I feel kind of bad for off putting HereToHelp and David. Do you have anything on mind? ChyranandChloe (talk) 03:59, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean "off putting HereToHelp and David"? --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 04:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

hey about delistings for NRHP2

Hi there. Happy New Year! Hey, I am trying to respond to a request for revisions to the NRHP/NRHP2 infobox at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Delisted property guidelines. I've tested some changes upon the "template:infobox_NRHP3" version and reported having some glitches in the discussion. Could you possibly please join in? Any help would be appreciated. Cheers, doncram (talk) 11:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Got ur notes to my Talk page. I think it's great that u have continued to learn about template programming, and re-integrating NRHP2 features into NRHP infobox is very worthy goal. There are not too very many NRHP2 pages out there, I think less than 1,000. I believe it would be possible to use AWB, which i now know how to use, to edit those. Where should the NRHP2 / NRHP3 / NRHP discussion take place? I think yes at wt:NRHP now. Go ahead and bring it up there. I may have some comments to make about further changes (perhaps). I noticed in particular that u accomplished the recent update to NRHP to handle delisting very elegantly with just one delisting data parameter, rather than the somewhat awkward previous 2-parameter treatments for NHLs, etc. (setting nhl=yes and setting designated_nhl = date). I don't know if u have already changed those so that NHL can be signalled by just a date, too. Why don't you explain at wt:NRHP what u have done and allow for some discussion there. Again, great work, and I am very glad u r still on board and have been thinking about this. Cheers, doncram (talk) 20:51, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely good of you to follow up about this. I responded just now in the thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Update to infoboxes NRHP2 and NRHP. I do agree it is about time to roll this out, and am willing to do a bunch of it using AWB as i explain there. AWB is a neat tool, by the way. You have to request permission to get access to it, and you have to use Microsoft Internet Explorer while using it, but it worked pretty well for me in the one application i have had so far: editing the 4,000 Massachusetts NRHP stubs' talk pages to include them into suitable wikiprojects. I'll look for your reply at wt:NRHP. doncram (talk) 00:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Obama Presidency

Please revert your changes on the page that changed his religion to United Church of Christ. He resigned his membership there and is no longer in communion with the church body. Thank you.Die4Dixie (talk) 21:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

[[1]] If you read it you will see that he resigned from the denomination.Die4Dixie (talk) 21:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I did it and added the cite.Die4Dixie (talk) 21:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. I had attempted to work with some other editors last month at Barack Obama and they were adamant about mentioning the Church of Christ, and it was the best compromise that I could get there. You are absolutely correct. Christian on its own would be best.Die4Dixie (talk) 22:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

In fact, seems like trouble is a brewing at Barack Obama. another set of eyes would be welcomed.Die4Dixie (talk) 23:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Perfect, Would you help me keep an eye on it for a while?Die4Dixie (talk) 23:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Obama's Denomination

Your amendment to the infobox entry to "Christian" is a good one. However, the "last associated with UCC" line is the product of long discussion and is consensus. Check out the talkpage archives (there's an archive TOC on the page). I've started yet another section about the matter on the talkpage and look forward to your contributions. Thanks, PhGustaf (talk) 02:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

using AWB

See new section at wt:NRHP about implementing the rollout. To use AWB, first go to wp:AWB and put in your request to be allowed to use it. Explain what u want to use it for, and an admin will approve you within a day or two. You have to download and install the software on your PC, which you can do while waiting for your approval. You can browse the user manual there, but you will learn fast by doing.

I think AWB is most useful for managing any long list of articles that need to be edited. You compose a list by various ways, using its "Make List" commands. Then, once you hit "Start", it brings the first article on the list into its edit window. You edit in that window, then when you press "Save", it saves that, removes that one from the list, and brings in the next article on the list. For repetitive small edits, it is much faster than finding and opening each article. Also, you can work through a list of articles over several work sessions. At any time you can save your current work list (to a text file), and then a day later you can come back and reload that work list and resume your work.

For the NRHP2 merger / rollout, i have set up a list of the articles that need to be processed. Hopefully people will mark off sections of that list which they are handling, and there will not be excessive duplication of efforts. doncram (talk) 18:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

seems like the AWBers have processed most of the 1500 or so, although i for one have yet to finish my last-taken chunk. I commented at the working page abuout Florida NHL-FL type needing clarification. Could you comment there? doncram (talk) 02:50, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Delinking dates

FYI this is somewhat contentious right now over here I'd hold off delinking anything for right now... We'll see what happens in the end. dm (talk) 00:44, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the memo. I'll let everyone know. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 00:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I see you've beaten me to it, though. Haha --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Corporate Governance

It was a phrase I heard regarding the 500K limit. It had a nice ring to it. But I have no prob w/ the edit. We need to keep this article as bare-boned as possible. Thanks--Buster7 (talk) 22:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Closing the MPRP

It's been a while, and the MPRP is about to be closed. I think we're pretty close to finishing, however I want to know what you think before I place my position on the issue. ChyranandChloe (talk) 21:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I've pretty much given up on it haha. I used javascript to use User:Dudemanfellabra/Sandbox2 as my main page, so I'm not really worried about it. I think the entire process was a failure, and there's no reviving it. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 04:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

LOL, that's what David said from the start. I've seemed to have placed some distance between it and myself as well. If there was a discussion on how to run a main page redesign proposal, how interested would you be? ChyranandChloe (talk) 03:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Meh.. I might participate here and there, but I wouldn't be as involved as I was with this MPRP. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 04:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks on Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama

This edit [2] on Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama violated our policies on not making personal attacks and editing in a cooperative and civil manner, specifically "Look dude, it's assholes like you that make the world a sucky place to live in. You muckrake and bring up crap to intentionally try to make people look bad. No one said anything about keeping her out because she was a woman; I thought we were mature enough not even to think about that. It's people like you that keep sexism, racism, and pretty much any kind of stereotypical hatred going. Get off your soap box and think positively.".

You can make points like that without insulting people in the process. Using the harsh language lowers the level of the conversation and is counterproductive for making your underlying point. It corrodes the Wikipedia community as a whole whenever people do that, and it's not acceptable behavior.

Please consider this a warning not to edit in that manner again. You can make those points without insults, and need to be more careful in the future.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:45, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

A more favorable climate is at hand. But it will be hard to reach it in the direction you are headed. The road you want is one marked by collaboration and cooperation not attack and counterattack. We are all on the same hyway. Tumultuous behavior and name-calling is so........yesterday!--Buster7 (talk) 22:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Yea I probably went about that in the wrong way.. I just wanted him (her?) to know my thoughts. In my opinion, at least one person needs to step up and say something like that to let them know what everyone is thinking... then we can go about the cooperating/collaborating. I'm all for getting along with everybody, but I make it known when someone is being destructive. Once again, sorry.. I'll keep myself restrained from here on out. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 22:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Obama/Lobbyist

I removed the bit about "21 people" lobbying. It's called revolving door, and is incredibly common in DC. A lot of people work private section positions between government gigs, like Cheney between Bush I and Bush II. Unless it's in the specific two years Obama has mentioned, it's irrelevant. Grsz¹¹ 23:15, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it's pretty relevant.. The sentence I added highlighted that they weren't all lobbying in the past 2 years. I think it's worth mentioning that there are that many former lobbyists, if only to demonstrate how hard his claim of "closing the revolving door" will be. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 23:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

bot programming

I've been browsing at wp:bot and Wikipedia:Creating a bot. I'd like to be involved in creating a bot, at first for the simple task of converting infobox NRHP2 calls to infobox NRHP, and later for other purposes including creating stub NRHP articles. There's a Unix "tooluser" server in Germany, apparently, which could be open for use in this, and which I would like to use. And, it would be possible to coordinate in other ways, such as via a Google project. If you could be interested in this, I would be very glad to work with you.

Have you used Perl? I have used it just a little, in the past, and have a Perl programming book. For suitability here, including use of a wikipedia-related library, and for my application elsewhere, I am currently thinking i would most like to use Perl. Another alternative would be C or Cplus or whatever, as used by the former Nrhpbot that created a bunch of Ohio NRHP stubs in July 2007. The owner hasn't responded to me, but code for that is freely available. I don't have C and have no experience in it, but I could use C programming for a different application, too. I do know a couple C programmers. Maybe C would be better. I used Unix environment a lot in the past, it's great for lots of things. I wouldn't mind setting up a Linux system if i could find an old PC to use for that, but don't have one currently.

Let me know. If interested, perhaps we could move off-line to discuss by email. doncram (talk) 21:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Obama Cabinet Template

Thanks, that looks much better. Spinach Monster (talk) 00:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

barnstars, thanks for major NRHP infobox update

		The Template Barnstar
		Thanks so much for your attention to detail, demonstration of programming skill, and perseverance in developing the recent major upgrade of the {{infobox NRHP}} infobox. It's been a major success, adding great features and changing 20,000 or so articles without any subsequent problems. It's a privilege to work with you! doncram (talk) 19:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		Thanks for helping along with others in the recent, successful rollout of the new NRHP infobox. Your support and specific assistance in getting it done is appreciated! We did a good job, as evidenced by no subsequent problems being reported, although it affected 20,000 or so articles. And it was sure more enjoyable working as a team to get it done. Thanks! doncram (talk) 19:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)