Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:23, 7 November 2007

affiliations
	WP:CHICAGO Director (2006–present)
	WP:FOUR Director (2009–2014) (disputed, 2013–2014)
	WP:WAWARD Director (2010–present)
	M:WALRUS Committee (2011–2013) (2016–present)
	WP:Ambassadors (2011–2012)

FA:

FOUR:

FL:

FS:

(Editor)

(Nominator)

FP:

(Photographer);

(Nominator)

VPICS:

(Photographer);

(Editor);

(Nominator)

FPO:

FT/GT:

MIL-ACM

DYK:

ITN:

GOLDENW:

CROWN:

STEEPLE:

GA:

ARS: Of the content above, (WP:AFD save)

(Redesigned formerly deleted content) WP:AFD:

WP:CSD:

Other:

2010 WP:CUP submissions (finalists) – WP:CHICAGO – WP:CHIFTD – WP:FOUR – WP:WAWARDS
My edit stats pages created

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting --~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

Archives

1-(20May06-03Oct06) 2-(09Oct06-05Nov06) 3-(07Nov06-26Nov06) 4-(24Nov06-12Dec06) 5-(12Dec06-31Dec06) 2007-JFMAMJJASO

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for November 2007

The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Barry Bonds

Sorry that I didn't reply before, I was going to tell you to go ahead and do whatever you wanted to do to it. Always good to see someone here appreciate my work. I don't have to be the page creator on anything new, it was your idea so go for it. Thanks for the props on the work. -- FPAtl (holla, holla, holla) 08:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, haha... source. I compiled it using stats from MLB.com, baseball-reference.com and a couple other sites, I can't even recall the actual pages. I know, I should have listed them, but I didn't think to. I just based the stadium on the time period, by using the dates stadiums opened and closed... like how they moved from Candlestick/3Com to PacBell/SBC/AT&T for example. For that situation I counted home HR's for Three Rivers from 1986-92, Candlestick/3Com from 1993-99 and the current park for all after 1999. I hope that makes sense. -- FPAtl (holla, holla, holla) 23:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

No doubt I screwed up somewhere, I'm sure of that. That's cool. Hope this thing gets accepted.-- FPAtl (holla, holla, holla) 00:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

SatyrBot

Hi, Tony! I've been working to improve SatyrBot's functioning, and I wanted to ask you two things:

1. Has the bot been working okay on new page tagging within the past week? Did you notice it's work on Saturday, and did it do alright?
2. Would you take a look at the offering page I've put together to "advertise" to other WikiProjects?

Many thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Image uploads

Hello, I've noticed that you have contributed a pretty large number of photos to Misplaced Pages. I was wondering if you would like to move them to Wikimedia Commons? I started tagging them with the necessary template to prompt people to perform this step, but there are so many, perhaps you'd be willing to do it yourself? The advantage of the Commons is that the images will automatically TrandWiki to all Wikimedia projects, making them available to many more people then they would ordinarily be available to on English Misplaced Pages. Of course, it's not mandatory to move them, just a kind suggestion that would be helpful to the project as a whole. Best wishes and happy editing! Nobody of consequence 00:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I'll just work on moving them little by little then, if you don't mind. Actually, the fair use rationale thing wouldn't apply, as Commons only accepts free images (for example, the ones you've taken yourself and released as GNU or CC). Any fair use images you've uploaded would be left on Eng. Wiki. Nobody of consequence 00:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 3 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Greg Skrepenak, 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.

—Wknight94 (talk) 13:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

• Replied on my talk. Sorry about that, Tony, my mistake. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 18:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC).

Re:Washington Park Race Track

Well, it is going to take him some time. What I can do is do a sort of "generic" geobox, that will include the map and the picture, with all the info that is currently in the box. Let me know if that is what you would like me to do, the colors won't be part of it....I think. I can try and figure that out too if you want. Let me know. I will also work on those other places soon as I fix up this Lyttleville, Illinois article I found.--Kranar drogin 14:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, got your other requests done. I have started a page here User:Kranar drogin/Illinois communities, where if you find more communities that need the geobox, you can just add them to the list there and I will get to them as I can. I am in the process of requesting a new Chicago Metro Area map, that would include GPS coordinates so I could start putting them in the Geoboxes maybe. I don't know what all is involved with that. See what I can get yas.--Kranar drogin 17:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I am working on a Race Track Geobox, so just bear with me a bit longer. I have to figure out all the fields, that way it can be used by like Chicago Motor Speedway or other NASCAR tracks.--Kranar drogin 19:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

South Side

I'll look at it one more time today, and post some comments at the nomination page. To be blunt, though, I don't think I'm going to vote support. Everytime I've read the article, I've found new problems. I just don't think it's going to be ready anytime soon. Zagalejo 19:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Cool. Zagalejo 19:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

GA finding

I had never seen that log, I might monitor it. I use Google a lot, looking for interesting new articles. Speciate 20:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Man Enters the Cosmos

• How is the last paragraph in "Details" relevant to this particular sundial?

In 5 above you hask about how this sculpture fits in with the rest of his work. This section clears some of that up.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• I think your rewrite causes some text shifts that make this question harder than it should be. I was talking about the paragraph that goes into detail about sundials. Explaning how sundials work in detail doesn't explain how the sundial fits Moore's other work. - Mgm| 20:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/20070616 Chris Young visits Wrigley (4).JPG

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:20070616 Chris Young visits Wrigley (4)-edit3.jpg, was nominated on Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 05:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK: Peter Bynoe

On 5 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peter Bynoe, 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.

--PFHLai 13:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

On November 6, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article milestone home runs by Barry Bonds, 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.

I wish you were an admin so you can help update. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:Misplaced Pages:List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits

Hey cool, thanks for showing me that. I haven't looked at my numbers in prolly about 6 months or so, didn't know I had that many edits in one form or another. Thanks again.--Kranar drogin 23:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

One North LaSalle

Sorry Tony if my edits seemed abrupt. I'm a zealous Chicago skyscraper buff who got a little carried away.

Anyway, as you can see from this diagram from SkyscraperPage there were four buildings taller than One North LaSalle when 1 N LS was completed: the Board of Trade even without the statue, the Chicago Temple Building, Civic Opera Building, and the Pittsfield Building. Also, others such as the Palmolive Building are taller if you include beacons and spires. Thus, One North LaSalle is an impressive example of towering Art Deco, but it simply wasn't the second tallest in Chicago.

Thanks for letting me explain the matter. --- Dralwik| My Great Project 02:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and re-edited the page. It would be interesting to find the origin of the "tallest structure" claim. My guess is that this building attracted attention due to its location in the LaSalle Street canyon, while the Temple, Civic, Opera, and Pittsfield buildings are scattered across the Loop. --- Dralwik| My Great Project 02:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Geoboxes

I just want to give you a heas up Tony. I have been talking with User talk:SatyrTN‎, and we are going to use the bot to place geoboxes on the 1,000 or more articles for cities and villages. I have requested that it skip the ones that have the Chicago Infobox on them, because I would rather do those manually if we are going to do them at all. So, a lot of the villages and cities in Cook County that do not use that template will be seeing geoboxes shortly. If you need me to expand upon them, please list them out on that page link I sent you. Thanks!--Kranar drogin 11:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Your sig

Hey Tony, your signature, is, and always has been disruptive. See WP:SIG#Internal links. I know you don't want to change it but I have noticed several people ask you to in the past. I suspect you won't so I have asked for a bit more consensus WT:SIG. Thanks. IvoShandor 14:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Wexler

No, you're ok, I saw him while I was researching Bynoe, just check for alternate spellings of his name. Speciate 05:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Today's featured list

Why are you running a support/oppose survey on your LOTD experiment? What you need for your experiment is simply a list of volunteers willing to participate in a trial run. Should you fail to get enough volunteers, the experiment won't run. You don't need people voicing negative opinions, there were enough of those the last time.

IMO, I don't think you've picked up on the scale of negativity towards the process you suggested. I believe you are flogging a dead horse. There was simply no positive feedback about the process (only about having FLs on the MainPage), and lots and lots of negative comments. Colin° 16:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm not an admin. I suppose the amount of "permission" you need depends on where you run the experiment. If the pages are contained within project space (e.g., Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Lists) then I'd have thought you can do more-or-less what you like. The level of advertising/spam needed to get enough volunteers might be a problem.

I suggest you lay out the page to make it very clear what you expect volunteers to do, with some examples, and what the end result might be. Then just ask for a list of names of volunteers for the experiment. Erase the Support/Oppose stuff from the talk page as the whole thing will just get bogged down again.

Oh, I don't really know why I'm giving you this advice since I think this proposal is dead. And trying to agree on a process before you've even got widespread support for FLs on the main page, is cart before the horse stuff. Why complicate the issue with a process that not everyone will like (and no process will be liked by everybody)? If, and only if, you get that support then people might be enthusiastic about participating in an experiment. Currently, I think you are ruining your chances of "a fair shot". Colin° 17:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Why not create a proposal that does NOT require voting? That is the reason I opposed and I am sure more people will support if you removing the voting aspect of your proposal. The Placebo Effect 18:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I mean not require voting on which list will be on the Main Page. The Placebo Effect 18:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fuck you asshat. Don't ever talk to me again. IvoShandor 18:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)