User talk:Rlevse - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rlevse (talk | contribs) at 10:10, 15 August 2006 (→[]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 10:10, 15 August 2006 by Rlevse (talk | contribs) (→[])(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

——————————————— MY TALK PAGE ———————————————


Home	Talk	About me	Awards	Articles	eMail	Contributions	Images	Notebook	Sandbox	Todo	Toolbox

Archives
15 Nov 2005 – 28 Feb 2006 01 Mar 2006 – 30 Jun 2006 01 Jul 2006 – ...

Re: MilHist and Scouting

I suppose there is a certain amount of common material between the two topics. (Whether this is because Scouting has been influenced by Baden-Powell's military background, or because Scouts are more likely to distinguish themselves in the military, or perhaps for some completely different reason would make a fine dissertation topic for some sociology student.) In any case, it's a pleasure working with you; I hope that the cooperation between the two projects will continue, to the benefit of both. Kirill Lokshin 04:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:FAC

Because it is something that escaped my attention, so small it was :)

Thanks a lot for your support and for pointing this one out!!! ^_^ -- Grafikm 21:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Libya

Thanks for your comments on the 'Feature' candidate Libya. I've fixed the inconsistent date format. I also felt as if I had already addressed Sandy's concern about the bibliography. Care to take another look and re-evaluate?

Thanks very much --Jaw101ie 21:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Thomas Hamilton (Dunblane murderer)

Sorry, I don't see the connection between this guy and BSA membership controversies. Certainly, the fact he was involved in Scouting would lead to some kind of reference in a Scouting article, but what would it have to do with membership policies? --Habap 18:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Randy

I appreciate your heads-ups. Please check out http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_18#July_18 Chris 02:04, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

ps-check out Talk:Scouting in Ontario. That guy's a big fan of unilateral actions. --Chris 03:54, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Participants

I know that only a few people commented, however, I hope that I won't get shot down. I just spent over an hour and a half working on that cfr. I hope that I won't be raked over the coals for this. Please don't be angry with me.
Lady Aleena talk/contribs 00:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

List of World Organization of the Scout Movement members

Hi Randy, could you please re-rate List of World Organization of the Scout Movement members? I added a couple of references and one external link. Thanks. --jergen 07:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Co-educational Scouting

What was wrong with my last edit on Scouting#Co-educational_Scouting ? (Egel _Reaction?)

What was wrong with Jergen's? You guys have been editing, even reverting each other. Pls sign posts.Rlevse 12:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I was mostly reverting myself. Hopefully this edit is better. (Sorry for not signing) --Egel _Reaction? 12:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that's the best combo yet. Nice. I see you work on Scouting articles. Feel free to join our project. Wim is a very active member. See: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Scouting, add yourself to the member section. We have a portal too, Portal:Scouting. In a few days, I'll be working on making the Scouting article A-class and then FA. Rlevse 12:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Medal of Honor - FA

I appreciate your comment about the Medal of Honor article. It was added to the Military history WikiProject announcements, but it hasn't had a lot of edits to it. I agree that it would be a shame to see it lose the FA status. I am not an expert on the history of the award, so, I have more questions than answers; able to help more with form than with content. I appreciate your help on the article and hope that others will add their expertise as well. — ERcheck (talk) 02:07, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Medal of Honor

Very nice; thanks for the help! (Unfortunately, US military history is pretty much completely out of any area of expertise I might claim, so there's little I can do for the article content-wise.) Kirill Lokshin 02:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Both of you, no problem. I used to run a MOH site and hunt imposters. I'll see what I can do on content.Rlevse 02:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Great to know this is an area of expertise for you. I will look to you as a resource on MOH information — which is very pertinent at the moment. Do you know how the medals were attributed during the Civil War? In particular, were members of the militia considered part of the Army when they were awarded the MOH. The example is Joseph H. De Castro. He was part of the 19th Massachusetts Infantry. (The question pertains to who was the U.S. Army's first Hispanic Medal of Honor recipient. David B. Barkley (WWI) received that recognition. So, is De Castro not considered to be U.S. Army?) (We've visited similar ground before with respect to USAAC, USAAR, and USAF.) — ERcheck (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

All the militia guys got Army MOHs. They certainly didn't get Navy or Air Force MOHs. Now why Barkley was declared the first Hispanic Army MOH, I don't know. Who decided that anyway? My guess no one has put 2 and 2 together much before this that he was or wasn't Hispanic. I just did a quick check and some site list De Castro as Hispanic and some don't, some list him as Army, and some don't, my guess is it's up to the web site maker who is and isn't army, but he for sure got the Army version of the MOH. As for saying a militia guy isn't Army, ridiculous. He is sure not Navy. This page calls him Hispanic and this page says his wife's father was from Spain. My guess he was Hispanic and no one has figured out he was the first yet. Contact the CMOHS about this and you may get a feather in your cap. Rlevse 21:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

You can see my confusion. I checked a lot of refererences. I did try to call CMOHS, but reached the after hours answering machine. If RL doesn't intervene, I want to give them a call. — ERcheck (talk) 00:33, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

RL?? Rlevse 02:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

My dear Rlevse

My dear Rlevse, as usual, it is a great pleasure to hear from you - and in fact, I ws planning to visit you pretty soon as I would like your input on a different matter. But first things first, so let's start by saying that your advice on the Comanche article is much appreciated, and I will follow it in detail - thank you so much! As I didn't write it myself, but rather I simply reviewed its historical and factual accuracy, it'll be kinda hard for me to add the needed footnotes. However, I have interacted with its main authors, and I can ask for their help in the task. There is no hurry - I'd rather have this article checked, doublechecked and improved as much as possible before even thinking about moving on to FAC stage.

At the moment, tho, I'm much more interested in hearing your thoughts regarding the Portal that I've built and currently maintain, Portal:Indigenous peoples of North America. I'm investing much of my time perfecting it, and I know it still has weak areas; the To Do and the Categories sections are not finished yet, tho I feel like the other sections look rather complete already. I've been updating it regularly for about the last month, and so far I've received good feedback from users who have become interested and learned about the subject through it. My main concerns are, do you feel it's ergonomic enough, decently designed, and so on? I've noticed that, for some reason, sometimes a section's frame doesn't display properly; as we speak, the Biographies one is out of shape. What do you think should be improved before moving on to Featured Portal candidates? Please, allow me to thank you in advance for your valuable time, your advices and your help.

As I said above, it is always a pleasure to see you, my dear Rl; please, drop by and visit me anytime you wish, even if there's no business involved and you just feel like saying hi ;) Big hugs, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 13:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw it, hun, I was monitoring your progress - thank you so much for the help! That had already happened to me at the Selected Quotes section before, so I'll keep that in mind whenever I update any section. Thanks so much! Please let me hear your thoughts regarding the Portal itself when you have the time to review it- no worries, there's no hurry. Again, thx, hun, I really appreciate your help :) Hugs, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 14:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Vote removal

I believe you have inadvertently removed my support vote to Caroline Island. =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

SO SORRY! I would never do that on purpose. I went to put it back, but see you already did.Rlevse 12:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

No probs :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:48, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Gideon Welles and Medal of Honor article

Thanks for the note on Gideon Welles. I'll give it some attention.

I've noticed all the hard work you are putting into improving the Medal of Honor article. Thank you so much! It is an important article and deserves attention from an expert. (I've added a few refs where I could find them.) — ERcheck (talk)

You've done a fantastic job with the Medal of Honor article. Thanks so much! (In the meantime, I did tag and expand the William McGonagle article. Fascinating reading. — ERcheck (talk) 19:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.Rlevse 19:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Portals

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Portals#Philadelphia_portal FYI. --South Philly 03:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Bricker Amendment

You were kind enough to comment on the previous FAC for the Bricker Amendment. I have now proposed it as a featured article after extensive revisions and would appreciate your vote here. PedanticallySpeaking 17:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

merge and Thai

Yes, please merge. The info is already in there, Brian Duke was going to put the stub up for afd in a few days. It would look better if it was one of you guys than me. The order as far as I know is UK, Chile, US, then Thailand. --Chris 00:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

ps-why are you changing the ratings on some of the national orgs?

For the PS, see the talk page of the project assessment page. For Thailand, they probably didn't know about Chile. So, most of the ones listed in the Growth of Scouting section must have come in late 1910, likely we'll probably never know the real order of all of them. Rlevse 00:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Can you link me to the project assessment page? It seems now the "High" category is bio and BSA-centric, where the national organizations have been downgraded. That will further convince non-US project members of perceived overfocus on BSA. Camps and such should be "mid", and nationals "High", not vice-versa. Anyway, please link me. :) --Chris 00:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

You're jumping the gun. I haven't gotten to camps yet, I'm still on countries, read the assessment talk first, this just started yesterday and the idea came from WIM, a Dutchman-;)AND we have Jergen's support. The V1.0 links are at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Scouting#Subpages_and_V1.0_pages. You can go directly to the assessment talk here. Wim knows more about assessments that I do too. Rlevse 00:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Mathbot

No idea. I'm guessing the cluster it was on may have been down, though. Kirill Lokshin 15:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

A former featured biogrpahy

Could you lend some support here Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Lloyd Monserratt. I would appreciate it. --evrik 16:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)]]

Re: Calvin Graham article & more

Thanks so much... I do appreciate that you are keeping an eye on articles and letting me know. Looper5920 tagged the articles before I saw your note. I did find another reference for the Calvin Graham article (the House Bill restoring his veteran's statues and backpay. The article on Carl Brashear deserves a bit more attention. I'm going to tag it for attention by the Project and see if there are editors who will work on it. — ERcheck (talk) 22:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Arthur Rose Eldred

Hello. The reason I chose not to place the article on hold is because some of the concerns I had went beyond minor edits/clarifications. If you look at the On Hold section of WP:GA/N, you'll see that the Good Article process is not a substitute for Peer Review. That's why I failed the article instead of placing it on hold.

That being said, you are of course free to re-nominate the article once you feel that the concerns I listed have been sufficiently addressed. Best of luck! --cholmes75 17:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

dyk about boy scouts

Hiyas. I wanted to let you know that I pointed out a timing question regarding your DYK submission (because I don't want it to accidentally be disqualified because someone thought we had more time before it disappeared off the 5 day timer), and another editor made a comment. If you can address those, I'd think it would help getting it into the dyk queue. :) Cheers. Syrthiss 18:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

todolist template

Not sure what the ethics/etiquette is, but I was impressed with your to do list template. So, um, I guess I borrowed it. I would be happy to credit you with it, but have no idea where or how. I'm just learning about templates so it came in handy.

--Geneb1955/_CVU 03:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, what is the address to it? I'd like to look at it. Rlevse 09:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

How about nominating Boy Scout for GA?

If you want me to give your nomination attention before I leave... Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC).

I did nominate it for GA on 26 July, but forgot to put the GA nom tag on the article. Rlevse 01:03, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Medal of Honor copyedit

Hi. I've been re-reading the Medal of Honor article. I have a number of questions/comments. Would you like them here on your talk page or on its FA review page? — ERcheck (talk) 20:25, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Put them here. Anything I don't know I'll move. Rlevse 21:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

This is only from the intro and the first section. All picky comments (though I can't imagine being more picky than the FAR). (Feel free to tell me if this is too detailed, too critical, or just more than you care to hear ;-)

Introductory paragraphs

P1. What it is: It all works.

P2. Uniqueness: The number of times it has been awarded doesn't fit in this paragraph. Perhaps the numbers should be put in another paragraph — not a long discourse. (Brainstorm — perhaps total numbers, number per conflict, numbers per service branch? )

P3. Distinguishing it from other awards: There are two types of awards being mentioned here: (1) the other military neck award and (2) civilian awards. The paragraph needs a lead-in sentence to set the stage, rather than just jumping in:

The Legion of Merit statement seems like it is missing context. First sentence says that MOH is a neck award, as is the LOM (the commander's degree distinction is not at all apparent in context; the reader could go to the LOM article, but they shouldn't have to.) Only neck award for "valor", then what is the LOM for? This needs to be clear. The general public will not immediately distinguish between valor and merit. Perhaps include in the sentence "... for valor — actions taken during combat operations at risk of one's own life that are above and beyond the call of duty — ...."

Civilian awards — a short lead in. Presidential Medal of Freedom (highest); others with "Medal of Honor" in their name.

Origin section:

P2, S2: "the idea of a decoration for individual gallantry remained through the early 1800s". What is meant by "remained"? Were there any awards made? Mentioned in the Congressional record or in miliary communiques? Reference. Could it be that: "Although the Badge of Military Merit fell into disuse after the American Revolutionary War, the concept of a military award for individual gallantry by members of the U.S. armed forces had been established. (Took out decoration as the next sentence talks about the Certificate of Merit and then the Certificate of Merit Medal.

P3, S2: "such a medal did enter service in the Navy". Is "enter service" the correct terminology? Would it be correct to say that:

"Scott did not approve the proposal for a U.S. Army award. However, such an award was established for the Navy when Public Resolution 82 that provided for a Navy Medal of Valor~~, which came to be called the Medal of Honor,~~ was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln on 21 December 1861." ... put the name at the end of the paragraph, as both the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Army awards took the name Medal of Honor.

From some of the citations, it seems that the legislation for both had the terminology "medals of honor" in them, not as a title, but as a descriptor. When was the official name of "Medal of Honor" given? This reference indicates that the name was established within a year of the USN and USA medals being authorized. Consider the inclusion of the "medals of honor" phrase of the legislation in the quotes about who is eligible.

See:

"Two Chief Engineers Were Medal of Honor Recipients?". Did You Know?. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Retrieved 29 Jul. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)

If you want more, I'll keep at it. — ERcheck (talk) 23:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure, feel free to edit it yourself, it's okay with me. I did the above edits. I think the stalling of removing the FAR has gotten ridiculous. It's clearly FA again and all this is tweaking that is outside the scope of the FAR, IMHO. But until whomever blesses it off, I guess we're stuck.Rlevse

Who does the "blessing"? I agree that the article is in great shape. I can't thank you enough for all of your diligent efforts in improving it and addressing all of the major and minor items. — ERcheck (talk) 01:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure who does the blessing.Rlevse 02:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Anarcho-capitalism

Thanks for helping out. It's nice to get some fresh people working on these articles. =) --AaronS 00:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Medal of Honor

As a rule of thumb it is advisable not to close reviews in which you have participated. The Medal of Honor review was obviously successful and closing it was the right choice but it is better to let a neutral person close it. Take care. Joelito (talk) 15:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, but no one would answer me about who does that. Rlevse 15:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Either I or User:Marskell usually do the closings but anyone is welcome to do it. I must have missed your question or I would have answered. Joelito (talk) 16:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I was just trying to help out. Glad we all agree the FAR was successful, a lot of work went into it! Rlevse 16:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

BSAseries

I had been checking them but hadn't seen any white space. Which one are your referring to? Is it, perhaps, browser dependent? --NThurston 16:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

It could be browser dependent. Here at work I only have IE, at home I have IE and FF. I fixed the merit badge one (for IE at least). It made my FA History of merit badges (Boy Scouts of America) article all whacky. I'll play with it for that article, OK? Do you use FF? Rlevse 16:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I use FF, but I do have IE installed. I'll check it out there, too. --NThurston 16:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I compared the first versions with the template in IE and FF, and only IE had a problem with white space. Good to know that this could be a problem. I LIKE the shorter template (makes better use of space), but in the case of MB History, it doesn't make much difference because it is the long TOC that is causing the Right Hand side white space now. A longer template would just flow down alongside the TOC. I'll check the other pages to see what effect the template is having in IE. --NThurston 16:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I see that you're making some progress with experimentation. You can use the samples as the logo image for the series template, but I haven't figured out how to include the caption and still have it look decent. I'll check back in a while to see what you have come up with. --NThurston 16:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

For now, there's a template just for History of merit badges (Boy Scouts of America) that is called "BSAseriesMBHistory". It looks just like this one, only it as another image below the box and above the portal tag. This is due to the unique layout of that article and all the white space.Rlevse 17:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

It's possible to make the inclusion of another image an optional tag, but we'll worry about that later.Rlevse 17:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I've noticed that the articles with long TOCs have white space underneath the portal tag, something to consider.Rlevse 17:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I think I have a better solution - I modified the BSAseries template to allow for a "lowbox". It is intended that the lowbox variable would be another template. So I created a new template - Template:MBHistory that I believe better displays what you had in mind. This approach keeps a single "series" template (only one thing to edit), plus it allows more flexibility in how the lowbox info would be presented - images, text, etc. I believe you will like this better. --NThurston 17:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

As for white space underneath the portal tag, I have looked at that, and it's not caused by the series template, but by the TOC. Articles that have short lead-ins and short TOCs do not have that problem. I don't think there are any that are really bad now, but if there's a specific one that is unappealing, let me know and I will look into a solution. --NThurston 17:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Outstanding! Nice job. I'll have the mbhist template I created deleted. Rlevse 17:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Seems logical to me to add the Eagle FA to the series under Advancement and Recognition. However, I have a concern about how it would affect the article. I have created a sandbox version. Please take a look, see what you think, let me know. --NThurston 19:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

This is about the best I could do, with the BSAEagleBadges on top. Why won't it stay under the BSASeries using the lowbox?--it goes to the side.Rlevse 20:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

It goes to the side because of the way the original table is formatted. I was able to get it to go under, but it's pretty big and flows down into the next section. --NThurston 21:53, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

OK - Your honest opinion - Are any of the versions you have seen clean enough to warrant making the change on the real page? Options - Badges & series boxes side-by-side, Badges over series, or Badges under series. Or should we just leave it out of the series box for now?--NThurston

None of them junmp out at me. I vote for leaving the article alone right now. Rlevse 22:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Same here, but I'll keep tinkering with it. Any other candidates for inclusion on the Series template? --NThurston 13:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Closing FARs

Hi Rlevse. Like all Wiki processes, you shouldn't close reviews you are directly involved in, as you did for Medal of Honour. I know it was meant well, as the consensus had moved to keep. Cheers, Marskell 19:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Kudos!

Great job with the Medal of Honor article. You put a tremendous amount of effort into it and it is much appreciated! — ERcheck (talk) 21:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Diligence

In appreciation for your persistent efforts in improving the Medal of Honor article in its Featured Article review, I present you with this Barnstar of Diligence. — ERcheck (talk) 21:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

You are most welcome. I can't begin to give you enough thanks for your work. I find your work on this, and all of the other projects you are involved with, impressive. — ERcheck (talk)

Wow, I am truly and sincerely humbled and surpised.Rlevse 00:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

'nother bout of merging, got your note, and condolences

Hi Randy,

I am sorry about the death in your family (just now read it), and hope you and your loved ones are well.
got your note on marking merges NA, which is what I am doing now.
please weigh in on Talk:Scouting in Ohio, we're going to have to fight this battle several times for a long while. I wish there was some boilerplate "no, your stub goes here" rule we could enforce somehow. Everyone thinks their stub is noteworthy by itself, when in most cases it's just a sub-par paragraph (many of my own smaller world articles included) which we need to give a home. Chris 01:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar

Why, thank you. --Smack (talk) 04:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. You posted a comment on my talk page by editing the last section, instead of using the "post a comment" link in the navbar. I know it's a minor error (it just messes up the edit summaries), but I think I've seen you do this twice now, so I figured I'd mention it. --Smack (talk) 05:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, Sorry, I'll try not to do it again. Rlevse 09:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind awarding of the Scouting Barnstar! I am just glad to be of service. --NThurston 14:03, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you know that ...

Did you know that LL Cool J was a Boy Scout? — ERcheck (talk) 03:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

No I didn't. Thanks. Since it only says he was in Scouts, not an Eagle, etc. I've only put him on our list of notable Scouts, not the project tag. Rlevse 09:52, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Scouting cats

If you want to add the Scouting categories to something, go ahead, but please don't remove them from any categories, we have them set that way for a reason.Rlevse 19:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, my buddy who thinks a training award to adults in an organisation aimed at children is a Top importance article! ;) What changes to categorisation do you have a problem with? I'm very familiar with WikiProject categorisation - I actually wrote the guidelines - and nobody has ever complained about my work before. I've reorganised dozens of WikiProject cats in the past. Pray tell whats up! --kingboyk 19:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC) PS Ah I see, the inclusion of WP1.0 assessments in Category:Scouting. You've been reverted on this twice, don't you think you might be wrong? Almost no other WikiProject does it your way, and those I find I'm changing. We keep infrastructure and mainspace categories seperate; mixing them is called a "self reference" and we generally don't do that. In the offchance I'm wrong (may well be of course) please take it to the WP1.0 talk pages for verification.

2005 US Grand Prix

You put 2005 United States Grand Prix on hold for a GA nomination a few days ago. I've had a stab at it and think I've addressed your concerns. See what you think. Cheers. 4u1e 18:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I made it GA earlier today, congrats-;) Rlevse 18:48, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

So you did. Ta very much. 4u1e 19:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Larch Hill

Hi Rlevse, I think that I have done what you suggested to the article. I'll continue to work on it. As a relatively new user who is just learning the ropes, as it were, I also just want to say thanks lots for your help! Stevecull 14:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

South African Scout Association

Hi, could you please rerate the South African Scout Association article, I've lengthed the lead, added some more content and fixed a couple of minor formatting things. I didn't add any more refrences, cause to my knowledge there aren't any more (All information is available from the SASA official website - albeit with alot of effort)

I've reformated and retyped large portions of the article, mind taking another peak and letting me know what you think of it now, thanks Jediwannabe 07:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a very nice article. I have at least two suggestions-see if you can expand the lead to two paras summarizing the article and find more than one footnote. The rest of my suggestions will depend on how far you want to go with this: GA, A-class, or FA. Let me know. Rlevse 09:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll get working on those two suggestions. I'd like to have this article a FA article (But A-Class is a good start for now) Jediwannabe 11:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Warnings

Hi -- I've now been warned twice by you. Could you please check the diffs on my talk page of the links I reverted? Thanks -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 23:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

It's all good. I just didn't want to come off looking like a vandal, you know? Happy editing to you, and thanks for helping out as one of the RC patrol brethren. (Crossposted) -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 01:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Great, we're wiki buddies now and let's fight vandals and improve articles! Rlevse 01:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Mortimer L. Schiff Scout Reservation

as for the merge stmt, I have to say is something to the idea that reservations that are or were national should not go into a state article...?Rlevse 21:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, but John Schiff Res was local, which is why I merged the one and not the other. Chris 23:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

USS Simpson

Actually there is a reason I reverted the Simpson article. If you check the edit history, the article has been mercilessly edited by someone adding tons of vanity entries and essentially unimportant information based on his stint on the ship. Because of this, I reverted to a version prior to his edits, so that I can go back later and re-add info that is actually relevant. Because of his editing style, it is simpler just to get rid of his edits and start again. For instance, you have reverted to a version where the editor has inserted his own name into the article and the format is completely wrong.--Nobunaga24 01:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

13th Dublin and 14th Dublin

I merged these into Scouting in Rathfarnham as the article on 14th Dublin is copyed and pasted from the article 13th Dublin. This seems to have touched a nerve and I have now been accused of vandalism (?!) by User:Jorgenpfhartogs when I am merely trying to ensure that there are no Scouting articles with identical content! Can you offer advice on the subject? Thanks Stevecull 23:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's obvious people are watching those two articles. Rebelguys2, a project member, offered good advise on Scouting in Rathfarnham talk page. You should mention it is Scouting project policy not to have articles on local units, but to group them as you're trying. Local unit articles usually don't have enough info to stand on their own and not get deleted or merged. If they do exist, they need enough of their own material and to be notable in some way. I'm not an expert on Irish Scouting, so I can't tell you if both should be fully merged into Scouting in Rathfarnham, but I can tell 14th and 15th should be merged into one article at a minimum. Contact User:ERCheck about a move (he's in MILHIST, but a friend of mine and an admin). Also, I did not see a merge tag on 13th or 14th, which meant no one got notice as far as I can tell. You could put a merge tag on 14th, list your reasons, and then ask for votes on our project page. Chris (Kintetsubuffalo) has lots of experience with Scouting mergers, You can ask him too. Let us know if you have more questions.Rlevse 00:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

The 14th and 13th units are two complete separate units. They are both based in Rathfarnham and the 14th was established by leaders of the 13th but since then they have very different histories. There are 4 more units in Rathfarnham so an article about Scouting in Rathfarnham should not include the history of the 13th and the 14th but should be a more general artical. Merging 14th Dublin and 13th Dublin would insinuate they are thesame unit, which they clearly are not. I'm an active leader in the 13th Dublin unit and therefore do not know anything of the history of the 14th Dublin since it was established. I also can't tell you more about the other 3 units, but I've requested info from them as to write an article about Scouting in Rathfarnham.

I've rewritten the page about Scouting in Rathfarnham a bit since the history of the 13th Dublin is not the sole history of Scouting in that area. I'm looking for more info on the other troops. By my knowledge there were/are 6 troops: 13th Dublin, 14th Dublin, 31st Dublin, 68th Dublin, Rathfarnham Girl Guides and a troop in Ballyboden that no longer exists. I've contacted the leaders I know of all troops in the area (Mountpellier Scout County and Three Rock Scout County) to enlighten me with any info they might posses. I beg all of you to leave the 13th Dublin and 14th Dublin articles intact.I will receive more info about the 14th soon so I'll be able to continuee their history from the moment they became a separate unit.I also started articles on the Scout Provinces in Ireland. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Jorgenpfhartogs

Jorgenpfhartogs's plan sounds very amibitious but I am very interested to see how it will turn out. Thanks for your input as always Stevecull 20:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

13th Dublin

The 13th has a very long and interesting history and we have enough material two fill 2 books In fact, there are already 2 books written about the history of the unit and the unit is mentioned in a lot of local history studies. I could write at least 200 pages about the history but I do agree that is not the case for each unit. In some cases an article for each unit would not be appropiate but in this case is fully believe that the history of the 13th does not belong in the article Scouting in Rathfarnham. I believe a separate article IS useful in this case. I will rewrite the articles. Jorgenpfhartogs 02:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

When I looked, the writing of both 14th and 13th were very similar, that's why I said that. And as I said, unit level articles need to be complete and able to stand alone; if you can make that happen, great. We have the (general) policy about local unit articles because they tend to be left as stubs and get deleted. Usually, merging them into a regional article saves their info. If you do write full articles on them, please put summaries in the Rathfarnham article with a "main" link to the full articles. Rlevse 03:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I've rewritten the articles 13th Dublin, 14th Dublin and Scouting in Rathfarnham in a way that (I hope) all of us can live with.Jorgenpfhartogs 06:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

13th looks nice. To be B-class I suggest a lead that summarizes the article and refernces--I'd also suggest if you could emphasize somewhere why it's unique. 14th is certainly different now, but is a borderline stub.Rlevse 10:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Sparty

Rlevse, I've added a useful book reference to the Sparty article and fixed the existing web citation. Let me know if it needs anything else to get up to GA status. Thanks for all your help! Lovelac7 02:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't find a reference for that Tommy Trojan line, so I just went ahead and deleted it. I also added another reference from another good MSU book. Take a look. Lovelac7 03:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. I added a few more links and gave it another copyedit. Lovelac7 06:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

sub-council articles

Randy, I hate that I have to keep having this conversation, especially with our regular contributors. Please check out http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Evrik#Resica_Falls_Scout_Reservation and weigh in. Chris 17:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Bhumibol AdulyadejRamaIX.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bhumibol AdulyadejRamaIX.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 15:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Jeez, That was a minute ago, give a guy a chance.Rlevse 15:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

An idea

I was wondering if you'd be able to comment on a proposal I've just started on. It's obviously quite inchoate at this point, but I'd at least like for someone to tell me whether I'm totally insane for even suggesting it ;-) Kirill Lokshin 18:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I think this is an excellent idea. The PR process is dying IMHO from lack of input as a lot of people seem to use FAC for a PR now. I also see the need for V1.0 interproject issues being handled in a more orderly fashion. Rlevse 18:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Final Fantasy VII FAC

Hi. Could you stop back by the FAC and let us know your reasoning for the continued objection? Since it's not based on the FAC criteria in any obvious fashion, the objection will be dismissed if it remains unexplained. Ryu Kaze 04:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

That's ok. So be it. And tell Deckiller he's being counterproductive. Rlevse 09:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

FAC - Banksia brownii

You recently reviewed this article doing some small edits and leaving a mild objection as the lead was too short. We have rewritten the lead and would appreciate if you have the time to pass by again. Thank you for your help and suggestions. Gnangarra 07:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)