See the archive index for a summary of all archived discussions.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

The DYK project (nominate) 23:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I have been looking over the Albany Parks & Recreation page to see what I can do to improve it and I noticed you had talked about it last year sometime. I have made a comment on the talk page I would like you to look over if you have the time. (also if you ever feel up to giving me some advice on the Albany page that would be good to as I know there are things there that need improvement but I need some advice as to what to do there too.MathewDill (talk) 18:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take a look at it soon. Jsayre64 (talk) 23:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

What should I do with this latest news about David Rubenstein donating $7.5 million dollars to help with the repairs on the Washington Monument the article in question is 2011 Virginia earthquake. References for that news are from politco and WTOP

References

• [1] on Politico
• [2] on WTOP

--Clarkcj12 (talk) 06:05, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

That's probably too off-topic for the article about the earthquake, but it would be great to add to the Washington Monument article. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at the article. Is it normal to post a link to a search of photos of Flickr? Just wondering--don't think I have seen that before... usually just a link to a specific gallery at Flickr. I wish some of the images could be transferred to Commons. This castle needs a Commons category of its own! Pretty cool structure. Looking forward to finishing the article. Feel free to chime in as your please! --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:52, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I've linked to Flickr searches in many other articles, but I've never really thought about that; since Flickr is such a popular photo-sharing site, I suppose search results could vary somewhat over time. I haven't heard of any guideline or general consensus about this, but if you think this Flickr contributor's photos are more useful overall than what I linked to, then by all means, replace the link. Getting some photos uploaded to Commons would, yes, be better than linking to photos in an external link, so I've asked that Flickr contributor to release some of his images under CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. If he agrees, then the article will have a much better chance of reaching GA! Excellent work on it so far, by the way. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

(TPS) probably not appropriate for a GA (see #9 under WP:ELNO), but.. for a starting article? Go for it. By the time it has photos you can remove the search link. tedder (talk) 04:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh… I should have noticed that rule. But like you said, we'll probably get enough Creative Commons photos that we won't need the link anymore. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you both for your feedback. J, you are my Commons/picture expert! --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:50, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your additional edits to the article. I have nominated it for GA status. Given the building no longer exists and there won't really be additional updates in the future, this article would make a great candidate for FA status (given one or two great peer reviews, GA nomination process, final research, etc.) Let me know if you see any other issues with the article, find additional information from the NRHP nomination form to include, etc. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Good luck with the GA! I'll help as best I can if I have time. Jsayre64 (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

The Flickr contributor whom I contacted has said he is willing to release some of his photos under a Wikimedia Commons-accepted CC license. He asked me what photos I want to use. Since you are the main contributor to the article, I'll let you choose which of the ones here you want to be able to upload to Commons. Then I'll relay your choices back to him and we'll have photos for the article! Jsayre64 (talk) 00:55, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow, great news! Thanks for your work on this. I am not too picky, though preferably we could have access to a few images of the castle's architectural features and a few of the demolition process. If I were cornered and had to chose I might go with the following:

• http://www.flickr.com/photos/giggles-fostoria/3582064559/
• http://www.flickr.com/photos/giggles-fostoria/3582855990/
• http://www.flickr.com/photos/giggles-fostoria/3370672415/
• http://www.flickr.com/photos/giggles-fostoria/3582855990/
• http://www.flickr.com/photos/giggles-fostoria/3609301106/
• http://www.flickr.com/photos/giggles-fostoria/3582078003/
• http://www.flickr.com/photos/giggles-fostoria/3582893408/

Perhaps I am being too greedy with this many images. I am not sure how many he is willing to upload, but I will take whatever I can get. I tend to take as many pictures as possible when I am visiting sites so whatever he feels best illustrates the building and its demolition would be appreciated. --Another Believer _(Talk) 05:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Sweet! Thanks again with your assistance. The article looks much better with images. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again for your assistance with this article. I am glad WPOR has one more GA to add to its trophy case! --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh, well what a nice surprise! I've been off-wiki for several days and I have much to catch up on. Great work with the GA! Jsayre64 (talk) 18:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Would you be willing to look at the description of the photo of Detroit Lake on the Detroit Lake page that describes a low water event in 1973. I believe this is false. The water level from year to year raises and lowers 119 feet. While this might have been a low water mark for this time of year in the cycle, I don't think this photo shows the lowest the lake has been. The low pool experienced every winter for this lake is much lower than in the picture. You can see bouys from the swim area still floating in the water in that photo and during low pool in the winter months, they are a few hundred yards from the water. I won't be making any edits, I seem to get myself in hot water too often. Thanks! John2165 (talk) 21:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for asking me about this. As explained at Wikipedia:Citing sources, a statistic like that needs to be backed up by a reliable source. I suggest that you search for information on the lowest the lake has ever been. If you cannot find a source to prove what the article claims, remove the information and state in the edit summary that there was no source to verify that information. And if you find that the lake was in fact lowest in 1973, add a citation to verify that. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I'm new to Wikipedia, so I apologize if I didn't follow the correct editing procedures. I definitely wasn't intending to do disruptive editing to the WestEd page. I was actually updating WestEd's content to be more current and accurate, and to more clearly and accurately reflect WestEd's operating structure, by organizing the content under two main umbrellas: (1) Research and Technical Assistance Centers and (2) Programs and Services. Wasn't finished reorganizing the content, but I'm sorry if I inadvertently followed the wrong editing procedure.

64.147.175.7 (talk) 21:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)RH

Thanks for contacting me about this and welcome to Wikipedia. Making edits like this give the impression that you're up to no good. If you intend to temporarily remove content and re-add it later in a modified form, you should indicate that in the edit summary field before you save the page. By the way, since you're new here, I recommend you visit this page. Jsayre64 (talk) 21:47, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that's helpful to know. Next time I plan to make edits, I'll indicate the changes in the edit summary page that you referred me to. I appreciate the assistance! 64.147.175.7 (talk) 21:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC)RH

Might want to use your image of fog in the Williamette Valley in the FOOD Section of the Los Angeles Times. I would need to know your name so as to have a photo credit. 144.142.12.1 (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2012 (UTC) Richard Derk Photo Editor Los Angeles Times 202 W. First St. Los Angeles, CA 90012 213.237.7907 Cell 213.494.5257 www.latimes.com/framework also: rderk.lat@gmail.com

Hi there!

We'd love to credit one of your photos of the willamette valley that we are using for a museum exhibit. Please let me know how you would like to be credited, or email me at stephanie@hello-upswell.com.

Thanks!

Stephanie Lanning — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephanieupswell (talk • contribs) 01:06, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for nominating the article! I had planned to do so once I was able to expand the article a bit more (I imagine the namesakes section could be expanded, and possibly even the events section). Hopefully the article still meets GA criteria. Perhaps we could co-nominate the article and tag-team the expansion and GAN processes? Your nomination took me by surprise but sometimes I need a fire lit under me to return to unfinished projects! :p --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:36, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Realizing now you said you didn't think there was much more information to add. That surprises me, but perhaps additional research will lead me to the same conclusion. --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:37, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh. I see you've added some more thoughts for expansion on the article's talk page. When I said I couldn't think of any more improvements to make, I was thinking of the kind of edits I'd made last November, which consisted of mostly citation tidying and MOS-style changes like non-breaking spaces, aside from a little work on the lead [3]. I had thought you were now satisfied with the length of the article, but I guess we have both misunderstood each other a little bit! The way the article is now, anyways, I think is good enough for GA. Jsayre64 (talk) 16:03, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

In case you haven't noticed, the article's GA review has started already. The reviewer put it on hold and we have until the 8th to address his suggestions (or at least that's the rule on GA noms on hold). Most of it all is going smoothly, except the reviewer thinks the article should say some more about national news/magazine coverage of Portland and its roses. I'm still pretty busy, like I've been all spring, so I could use some of your GA skills. --Jsayre64 (talk) 01:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Wow, I was surprised to see the GAN closed. Good for you for challenging the decision. If you object, I totally understand, but would it be appropriate to add myself as a co-nominator being the creator and main author of the article? I promise to closely track the article's progress through the GAN process! I was a bit distracted this first round, being at Wikimania, buying a house and getting through everyday life! :p Thanks for your contributions to the article and first GAN attempt. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh! Sure, I'll list you as co-nominator. Thanks for saying so. I was indeed very frustrated this morning to learn what happened with the GA review (maybe you could tell); it seemed very unfair to me. It reminds me a bit of Finetooth and his FAC last fall, when that article's quality was limited to GA instead of FA, for some reason. But anyways, I asked for another review right away because that seems like the best way to just get someone to pass the article. Though it turned out the review overall was somewhat rougher than I had predicted, I'm glad you got things done off-wiki instead. This time, things should go better. Jsayre64 (talk) 00:16, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Much appreciated! Round 1 should not have closed the way it did, but we're moving on to Round 2... --Another Believer _(Talk)

Thanks for your contributions to the article and talk page this morning. I have expanded the sports section a bit, but references are needed (one of the associated articles were outdated or missing). The article will look great without the "cn" tags, and I hope to incorporate information about the rose murals throughout the city into the article somehow. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'll see if I can find some references. I'm still following the article closely right now; we can discuss things on its talk page. Jsayre64 (talk) 16:35, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

I reviewed your nomination and found it to be a wonderful little article. I have just one question to ask at Talk:Natchez Massacre/GA1 before I pass it.

Best wishes,

MathewTownsend (talk) 18:59, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Passed. Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:30, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I saw you put it up for AFD and I support redirecting it also. In the future, you can do the redirect yourself. Put WP:BOLD in the edit summary with a short explanation of why you're doing it. Someone can revert what you do, but you won't get in trouble. Then go to AFD. Cheers!...William 22:14, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Roses in Portland you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Viriditas (talk) 11:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Last year you commented about editing the template GR [4]. As I understand the process, the template documentation is what needs tweaking. That material is not protected. I'd do it myself, but it seems technical. So I'm reluctant. Any thoughts?--S. Rich (talk) 05:01, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest, but I think I was mistaken. {{GR|r8}} appears to link to the the 2010 edition, so nothing needs to be done. Jsayre64 (talk) 03:13, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

<font=3> You're invited to participate in Wikipedia Takes Portland 2012, an annual event which occurs each September in Portland, Oregon as part of Wikipedia Takes America and Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States. Photographing sites in Portland listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the main focus of Wikipedia Takes Portland. This year the event will kick off at Saturday, September 22nd at noon at Pioneer Courthouse Square. Currently, there are no formal plans--this is simply an opportunity to meet fellow Wikipedians before trekking around PDX to photograph sites on the Register. Not interested in coming downtown? You can still upload your images as part of the international photo competition. Be sure to RSVP and share the results of your work HERE (number of images uploaded, links to galleries, successes, feedback, etc. Click here for more information about meetups in Portland! --Another Believer (Talk) 15:07, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting on the VP discussion on edit window changes; we've got another set of ideas if you want to chip in :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

<font=3>WIKIPEDIA LOVES LIBRARIES: MULTNOMAH COUNTY EDIT-ATHON! You're invited to participate in Wikipedia Loves Libraries 2012, an edit-athon hosted by Multnomah County Library for the purpose of improving stubs relating to Multnomah County. The event will take place on Saturday, October 27, 2012 from 2:00-4:00pm at the Central Library in downtown Portland. You can view details about this Wiki Loves Libraries event here. Be sure to RSVP and share the results of your work HERE. Click here for more information about meetups in Portland! --Another Believer (Talk) 21:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		For doing such good work on the Natchez Massacre article, keep it up! Michaelmas1957 (talk) 04:37, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Why thank you! I much appreciate your help as well. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi there,

I'd like to use a photo of a Rough skinned Newt that you took for our Yukon Amphibians brochure. It's a free brochure that informs Yukoners and visitors about animals in the Yukon. Though we don't have Rough skinned Newts it's one of the ones we tell people to look out for, as many animals are moving north it seems.

If you would like to email your name, I'd be happy to give you credit. carrie.mcclelland@gov.yk.ca

Cheers 199.247.128.35 (talk) 20:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Jsayre. Not sure if you are following the discussions or not, but if you have any interest in contributing, several WikiProject Oregon members are working on MCL-related stubs together. Right now we are just working on overcoming the AfD nomination, but ideally we would get these articles to Good status. --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been pretty busy, only monitoring these WP:ORE discussions a little bit. But I'll be sure to do whatever I can when I have the time. Jsayre64 (talk) 01:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to this wonderful project. Hope you have a great Thanksgiving! --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:00, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! You too. Jsayre64 (talk) 23:31, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey, now that all the remaining issues from the Natchez Massacre FA review are dealt with, do you reckon we should re-nominate it? Can't see any reason why it wouldn't be promoted now. — Michaelmas1957 (talk) 07:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I was just thinking about that last night, when it was too late. I'll nominate it again and list you as co-nominator. Jsayre64 (talk) 01:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

	AB Award!
	In appreciation of your contributions to Wikipedia, I hereby present you with the AB Award. By expanding and promoting one of these stubs, which I like to think of as seeds, you have improved this wonderful collaborative project. Thank you, and keep up the great work! Another Believer (Talk) 19:46, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Creative barnstar! Thank you and you're welcome for the help. Jsayre64 (talk) 02:48, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey all :).

I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).

You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).

If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office ^connect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Reading the comments at the FAC, I think people recognize that you are specially trained and mentally equipped to write this and similar articles ... they just feel that a FA will typically include more perspectives than you might normally include in your own work. I don't expect this article will get bogged down at either A-class or the following FAC. If it were me, I'd just add some material from some of the sources suggested at the past FAC, ask on the article's talk page if anyone wants to offer any opinions on the work done so far, then nominate it for A-class and we'll go from there. Best of luck. - Dank (push to talk) 13:23, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. At this point, after so much more input than I'd expected at FAC, it doesn't really bother me that the nomination has been closed. The only difference it makes is that the next time around, I'll need many of the same editors to look at the nomination, which will require visiting a lot of talk pages. Jsayre64 (talk) 17:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Those guys are all reliable reviewers ... enough of them will be around to wrap things up quickly. - Dank (push to talk) 17:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)