User talk:Wehwalt/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Thanks

		Babysitting Award
		Thanks a lot for watching the Grand Coulee Dam FAC while I was away. It was improved and promoted with help from you!--NortyNort (Holla) 01:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

TFA

Thanks for fixing the chart-- sick as a dog today and didn't have the energy. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. Feel better.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:51, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Morgan dollar

Hi Wehwalt. Not to be a bother, but could you check the Red Book for close paraphrasing in the sentences that reference it in the Morgan dollar article? If you don't have it with you, don't worry about it. You probably don't have VAM, do you?-RHM22 (talk) 14:21, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

It will have to wait for next week. I don't own VAM.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem! I suppose there's no way to check for VAM then.-RHM22 (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it is online. Short of going to a library that has it, or ordering it, it might be hard.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, it has been promoted to FA!-RHM22 (talk) 02:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! I was too busy celebrating the graduation of its classmate, Pipe Dream (musical) to notice! People are going to start to sit up and take notice at the coverage of US numismatics.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I hope so. Before you started work on them, there were barely any good numismatic articles. Congratulations to you for Pipe Dream! I don't have much of an interest in musicals, but I can see you're doing a great job on improving those articles as well.-RHM22 (talk) 03:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. You did a great job.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for the help in getting it to that level. It would have been very difficult to navigate the process without guidance.-RHM22 (talk) 03:15, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Still, you would have been just fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:20, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, I don't think I would have even gotten as far as nomination, seeing as how my first article didn't have any references until you suggested it!-RHM22 (talk) 03:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, you'll pass it on to the next guy then.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

(od)Yeah, it's too bad there aren't more people interested in numismatics around here, though. I know there are a lot of great coin writers, but most of them haven't found Wikipedia yet. Hopefully our contributions will help get some people interested.-RHM22 (talk) 03:49, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Nikita Khrushchev

I respectfully request for you to reconsider my edits, before claiming them as "mostly irrelevant". I do not see grounds for such tagging.

I think the origin of his family is not so irrelevant. In my opinion it is very relevant to disclose as much as possible about the family of Khrushchev considering his impact on the World history. Nina Kukharchuk (April 14, 1900 - August 13, 1984) was born near the city of Kholm (Russian Empire) which is thousands miles away from Donbas. Also they did in fact get married in 1924, but their official registration of the marriage did not take place until 1965. The fact of them being married in 1924 for some reason is not mentioned in the English article. Nina Kukharchuk also was the first among the wife of Soviet leaders who officially escorted his husband on his tours including the ones abroad. She was buried at the Novodeviche Cemetery in Moscow. Also Andrei Konchalovsky provides interesting insights about him such as the fact that his son became the victim of Stalin's repressions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FREG2VQTk88&feature=related).

Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 14:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

What you are talking about is his wife's family. And the fact that they did not register their marriage until 1965 is in the article. Why is this a major issue? This is a very long article and if material is to be added, it must meet a high standard.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Back at work

I've had a quiet 10 days or so. Rinaldo comes up as TFA tomorrow, so that may not be so quiet. But anyway, I've started work on Tom Driberg, as I need to keep away from musical articles for a bit. But I definitely want to do Nixon in China next. Once Driberg is safely at peer review, around 5 March, I'll be ready to go. Does that suit? Brianboulton (talk) 23:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

That's fine. I have a couple of coin articles starting soon and I may do another R&H., but scheduling is flexible. I hope your break has refreshed you. I've been getting a few reviews done, nothing strenuous.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Wehwalt/TopMenu‎

The 1.17 coding has thrown somethings off on alot of userpages, including the TopMenu on your page. I have a temporary fix to get it above that gray line, but it isn't permanent. I have called in coding guru User:Jack Merridew to take a look (he worked on my userpage after the 1.17 coding messed everything up) and see if he can't get it back to the previous look. So, while he is working, you may see some changes to the TopMenu page and possibly your userpage. My apologizes for the inconvenience this might cause. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I only look at it when I change it or I need a quick link to an article, don't worry. The User page is our "front yard", it is for everyone else to see, we relax in our "back yard", the talk page.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:50, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I need help

Please, Wehwalt. The article that CamrynRocks! and I created, Eagle County Charter Academy, is up for deletion. I don't want it to be deleted, but they have some good points. Will you help me convince them not to? I need to get an okay for something first, but I know that you're an administrator, and you might have some more luck convincing them.Mountain Girl 77 (talk) 15:21, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The discussion closed as no consensus. Unless review is requested that ends it for now and the article stays.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Tuesday

I have some things going on. Will be Tuesday, before I run through it. Somehow plot didn't grab me as much as the other two. Still need to power through the Acts.TCO (talk) 07:19, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Didn't grab too many other people either. Many thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:11, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Duke_lacrosse_case

Please read the article before reverting NPOV edits, the article is clearly heavily biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.81.199 (talk) 00:17, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Template

Hi Wehwalt. I'm not sure if you're interested or not, but I created an interesting template for linking to FACs. Just type this: {{User:RHM22/FA|name of article|archive number}}. For instance, to link to the nom for Morgan dollar, I would just type {{User:RHM22/FA|Morgan dollar|1}}, which makes this: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Morgan dollar/archive1.-RHM22 (talk) 03:09, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Sounds easier to remember than how to do it normally. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:11, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I made it to let others know that I responded to concerns. I think there is a template that gives the whole thing (hello, I responded at FAC, thanks for reviewing, etc), but I prefer to leave a personal message most of the time.-RHM22 (talk) 03:15, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

By the way, why didn't my rollback work when that person blanked the copyright questions page? Was it because SineBot added the signature and it rollbacked to that? I've used the reviewer power a lot already, but this was the first time I tested the rollback function.-RHM22 (talk) 03:16, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that is what seemed to have happened. So I had to do it the hard way.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Foiled again! Anyway, I made my FAC link a regular template, so now you just have to type this: {{subst:FAClink|Name of article|Archive number}} to make the link to an FAC.-RHM22 (talk) 03:56, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

That'll help. I think we'll wind up short of DYK credit on the Kennedy. On the other hand, I'd say we could easily have the article in shape for reviews by the end of the week.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:00, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it definitely won't make DYK since there was already a lot there, even ignoring lists. It looks really good though. Are you going to nominate it for GA, FA or PR?-RHM22 (talk) 04:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

PR, I think, at first. Can you write something for "varieties and collecting"? I see that as a hodgepodge of errors, the Bicentennial 40 percent pieces, proof coins, silver coins, anything else that can be thought of. Of course, if you think it will work better another way, feel free to propose it.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Nope, I like your way. I'm going to write one or two paragraphs on errors and stuff (if I can find good refs) and one on the collector varieties (1976 40%, silver proof, etc). Do you think that'll be good?-RHM22 (talk) 04:07, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

That'll be good. I'll probably supplement a bit from the book. I really meant varieties, not errors. Also a good place to integrate your specs on the silver coins.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:17, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I meant varieties also. I still mix them up when I'm not thinking about it! Anyway, I'll start work on that tomorrow.-RHM22 (talk) 04:28, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Do you have any information on the 1964 accented hair proof? I'm having some difficulty locating any reliable sources on the internet.-RHM22 (talk) 17:21, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

(od) Yeah, I think the book says something about it.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:22, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, if I add the info, could you go through and add the cites from your book?-RHM22 (talk) 18:52, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Sure.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:10, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

This is off topic, but you wouldn't happen to have a copy of the Director of the Mint's annual report for 1977 do you? It has scans of Gasparro's Liberty design for the small dollar, which is PD since it's a US government creation. I have an online version, but it's rather low quality.-RHM22 (talk) 19:22, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

No. Email the ANA library and see if they will scan that page for you.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:23, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't think so! I wonder if they sell those reports in a volume or something? The information in them would probably be invaluable.-RHM22 (talk) 19:27, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I wish the Mint had a library ... I'd email the public information office. At the time, you could buy them for a buck through the Superintendent of Documents.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:30, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

They put the new ones online. I think they started doing that around 2000 or so.-RHM22 (talk) 19:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Some early ones are on Google books. Aren't there certain libraries which are document repositories? They might have it.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

There might be. I found a website that has all of them from 1792 to something like 1820. Anyway, I added some stuff about the 1964 proof to the article and some hidden comments.-RHM22 (talk) 19:42, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll get on that shortly. Always good to remember that offline resources can be very helpful.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:45, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't have much on the Kennedy half dollars. I know there was some information about that proof in the 1960s Coin World issue, but I can't find it at all. Should the 1987 stuff be added to the collector or the history section?-RHM22 (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, given we don't have much to say about the half dollar after the Bicentennial I suggest just leaving it where it is.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:56, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Congrats!

Just wanted to give you a congratulations for Pipe Dream being promoted to FA status. Good work!4meter4 (talk) 02:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Someone had to do it. Pipe Dream triumphs while The Sound of Music lies in the dust.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:02, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Congrats! Connormah (talk) 03:59, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I have to say that is the fastest from DYK to FA I have seen lately. I guess time flies when you are having fun. :) KimChee (talk) 05:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Really, it is because the DYK expansion in these articles was rather a task due to their previous length! So they are ready for DYK and FAC around the same time ...--Wehwalt (talk) 07:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

History of the Soviet Union (1953–1964)

Seeing that you know so much about Nikita Khrushchev and his era, could you take a look at the History of the Soviet Union (1953–1964)? It's in really really bad shape so I wondered if you could take a look at it. The article was created by a split of the History of the Soviet Union (1953–1982) article into two seperate articles; the one mentioned and the History of the Soviet Union (1964–1982) which I've been working really much on resently, however it needs a copyedit soon. But that's not my point, can you take a look a the 1953–1964 Soviet history page? If so thanks! :) --TIAYN (talk) 15:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure. I can't say i will improve it; my Khrushchev references are scattered. But I'll see if I can help. Did you understand my reasoning not to link to it as a main article?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, think so, because it covers the period from 1953 to 1964 (and the section from 1955 and 1964), or because it's not the main article or thirdly, it's in to bad shape and doesn't look like a main article at all... It's okay, but I feel it should be linked somewhere in the article since the time of the history article covers Khrushchev's post-Stalin's rise to power. --TIAYN (talk) 16:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I put it in as a see also. Khrushchev was one of the most difficult articles I've ever done and I'm a bit protective of it.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

That's understandable; It's one of the best articles I've read on English Wiki! --TIAYN (talk) 16:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Flattery will get you a fair distance. Anyway, I'll look at the History article when I get a chance. Perhaps some of the refs from the Khrushchev can be pasted across with little work.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Bing

Did you see the Bing homepage today?--NortyNort (Holla) 08:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Damn. I'd kill for a pic like that for the article. Notice how low the water is, btw. I'l have to check for recent news on that.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Yea, what a beauty. Maybe we could reduce the resolution and make some fair-use rationale. haha. I hope the reservoir fills, I was reading an article late last year about how it broke the all time level from the 1950s and it was a few feet from inoperable turbines. The Rockies need some good snowpack and flooding right about now.--NortyNort (Holla) 08:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I much prefer the 1983 image. The spillways need a good test. When I was there last month, the spillway entrances were bone dry. Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow (in the upstream states, please).--Wehwalt (talk) 12:36, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Kennedy

I'm just tickled to see this at FAC. Tickled, I say. Thanks for all your hard work. --Andy Walsh (talk) 03:46, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:47, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Image

Hi. I saw on JeanColumbia's talk page that someone is trying to delete File:Me and Juliet 1953.jpg, so I thought I'd let you know. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:37, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Oops, never mind. I see you removed it yourself. -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have no problem letting that go as I have a no-copyright playbill for Me and Juliet with the same artwork and will upload it later in the day. Thank you for the note.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:32, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Wehwalt. I'm not sending out thankspam, but I would like to thank you personally for your support on my RfA. I've now had time to read through your own RfA, and I know exactly what what you went through and how you must have felt. It was long before I became really active on Wikipedia, but the main thing is you passed, and incredibly, like me, at your first attempt. Congratualtions at the extraordinary contributions you have since made to this project, and I look forward to working with you as fellow admins. --Kudpung (talk) 14:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, my RfA showed some foreshadowing of what has become the ugliness of RfA, but you got the full treatment and survived. You are to be commended, Sir! And welcome!--Wehwalt (talk) 17:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Frank Buckles‎

Hey Wehwalt, I was wondering if you are busy with any other projects. I ask, because I would like to take the Frank Buckles‎ page to GA and on to FA. With Mr. Buckles death, I think the best honor that Wikipedia could give him is to put his page on the front of Wikipedia. Since he was somewhat "local" to both of us, this shouldn't be difficult to get information, pictures and the like. If this is something you can do, please let me know. I will be glad to help and co-nom the article on GA and FA. Just let me know. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:08, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I will look at the article. Just saw his obit, actually in the NY Times.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, seen it come across the Twitter wires (as I like to call them) about 11:30pm last night. Not ashamed to I did shed a tear or three when I read it. Kinda hard not to. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:33, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree, I remember when the last Spanish-American War veteran died, and if I'm lucky, I'll live to see the end of the WWII vets. That will make me sad as it will be so close to home. No close relative of mine fought in it (my father could have but went to college instead: I'm sure my grandfather knew the head of the draft board although going to college in 1943 was not for the faint of heart, he did a four year course of serious chemical engineering in three). All the same, it seems close to home.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:01, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. My Grandfather, Dad's Dad, who I sadly never got to meet, was in WWII. Though, for some reason, his name isn't on the WWII wall, which really bothers me. I am not sure if it is because he passed away after the war or what, but I figured all veterans that served in WWII had their names on the wall. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:42, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

My paternal grandfather was also in WWI, but did not get any closer to the action than Aberdeen Proving Ground. He died when I was 12, I remember him well. My family has not produced many soldiers, I am afraid. I suspect that this is an article with few book sources, as this guy didn't become prominent until he became the last of the generation, though no doubt his service was honorable indeed. The last French soldier has a FA, his name escapes me. I don't know when I will start on this, but sure why not? I've been looking for a warfare article to do. Not tonight, I just flew cross country and my bones are tired. I'm just cleaning up a few things and checking my messages before utter collapse.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Only one soldier that we know of and that is the aforementioned Grandfather. My Dad was in the Navy for 14 years. Dad made it very clear to me, if I had any intention of getting into the service to "get them the hell out of your head now." The reason, he almost lost Mom and I while he was out to sea. Mom had had enough of the Navy and him being gone up to 6 to 8 months at a time and I was in the throes of Autism, which wasn't being treated correctly (Navy docs, go figure) and Mom wanted Dad home. So, in a letter (before the internet), she told him "the Navy or us". Dad quickly made his decision and he is about 25 feet from where I sit in the other room with Mom. Mom had an Admiral of the Navy get Dad home. :) Dad never wanted me to get to the point in a relationship where that ultimatum had to be given or the chance I lose someone I loved while out to sea or overseas.

Anywho, no worries about starting it tonight. User:Anythingyouwant‎ has done an insane amount of work on the article today. It has reached B class, so that is something. It will be OK until the jet lag goes away. :) Have a Good Night. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Impressive, both the story and Anythingyouwant. I'll look at it today. No, with the exception of my grandfather and an uncle who was drafted during Korea and spent his time in Germany (go figure), we've steered clear of the armed forces.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I have Google'd some of the better sources and have them saved. I think we could also have a quote or two (via Google Quotes, sourced to newspaper articles) and could have something GA quality very quickly. It is, I think, nearing where it could go to DYK. From there, I think it would be pretty easy with all the information having been released and to be released in the coming days, that we could update this page to GA and FA strength quite quickly. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Talked with MuZemike, sine he is a whiz at images, and he said that we can use this image ( from here) under {{PD-USGov}}. That image is of a 20 year old Buckles "on his way to a reception for Gen. John Pershing in Oklahoma City in 1920." Pershing and Buckles "discussed their home state of Missouri." There is another photo, really good one too, that shows Buckles around 110 (no age is given on the photo), but I am waiting on a call back from Tribune Media Services to get confirmation on if the image is copyrighted or if it is able to be used under our non-commercial reuse guidelines. I will let you know about that one.

So we do have a nice image (perhaps two) that can be used on the article. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Why in the world?!

Okay, I don't want to sound dramatic, but why is it when I click on the link to Eagle County Charter Academy, it goes to Wolcott? Why has it been merged? I thought that the outcome was that the article would stay as is. Am I mistaken?Mountain Girl 77 (talk) 17:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

(Talk page stalker) Hi. It was redirected following an administrative decision 'no consensus' which you can see at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagle County Charter Academy. Wehwalt will give you more information. --Kudpung (talk) 17:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I thought that it would too. I'm surprised.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

There was a later discussion (redirecting as per discussion with AfD closing admin) here. I was not involved but it may shed some light. --Kudpung (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

It's since been archived - here's a better link: User talk:Stifle/Archive 0211#Eagle School. --Kudpung (talk) 17:50, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. That's an ... unusual procedure.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I find it interesting too. Is this a case for WP:REVDEL? --Kudpung (talk) 17:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC) - hang on, no, it's just a case of reverting the redirect.

I'm starting to get angry here, more for Throwaway85 than myself, as he was once falsely accused and blocked for being a sockpuppet. But clearly, there's the belief that he and I were meatpuppets in that discussion.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant deletion revision.Kudpung (talk) 18:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I think it is going there but I don't want to act in haste or rashly. I've notified Throwaway85 of this discussion, I'd like to hear what he thinks. This is very strange. And without any notice to anyone.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:03, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I commented in that AfD and you and I were on opposite sides, but that's besides the point. I don't want to get involved at this stage. It was a very contentious debate. I'm only interested for my learning curve. Kudpung (talk) 18:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh sure. And Mountaingirl has to be the advocate for her own work. I just wish there had been a little less assumption of bad faith.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Will this help? It's recent. I've looked at the article again, read the AfD again, and checked the refs. I'm curious what the three revision deletions were.Kudpung (talk) 21:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't access that. Was it oversighted?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I had the revisions oversighted for the same reasons I originally contacted you in regards to CamrynRocks!. I'm reluctant to explain the apparent canvasing for the same reasons. Throwaway85 (talk) 03:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I gave my honest opinion.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:34, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted the redirect and asked for discussion prior to further actions. As a heavily involved party, I won't be reversing any further redirects or merges. Hopefully we can sort this out on talk pages.

Hello, Wehwalt. You have new messages at Yaksar's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kennedy photos

Hi Wehwalt. The photos of the medal look great in the article! Do you want me to remove the margins?-RHM22 (talk) 21:46, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Please. Feel free to play with the captions or move the images if you want.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:47, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I cropped the images. The article should reflect that in a few minutes. For some reason, there's always a delay when I edit Commons.-RHM22 (talk) 21:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I put both images within a "multiple image" template. Do you think it's better that way?-RHM22 (talk) 22:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

It might contort the text a bit too much, or so someone will say. I'd try to make the text in that section L shaped instead of U shaped, if you get my drift.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

How about if we align the images vertically instead? It will distort the text a lot less that way.-RHM22 (talk) 00:03, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

That'd work.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Question on Naming

What would be correct here: Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod v. FCC or Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod v. Federal Communications Commission? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

A lawyer would probably use the abbreviation, but I don't know what our practices are here.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, I will slide over to AN and see what the consensus is there. It is probably the abbreviation, but I want to make sure since this is for the college Ambassador program. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

You can tell them you approached the Great Oracle and I in a thunderous voice said "Reply Hazy, Ask Again Later".--Wehwalt (talk) 01:34, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

As the Alice Mudgarden song I am listening to right now says you "ain't right". :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Just my two cents, but I would go with the more commonly used name, in this case FCC. I would do the same for CNN or NHL, but I would use Bank of America instead of BoA. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Throwaway85 (talk • contribs)

So far, it is 2 to 1 in favor of FCC. Thanks! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassador Program

Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:11, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

In progress comments

My ACT 1 comments may not reflect some changes you made while I was working (just integrate). I will refresh for Act 2. This is worse than going through an APA. TCO (talk) 19:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is not a problem. I am unsure what an APA is, but it is clear what is intended from context. Thank you very much for your help.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Asset Purchase Agreement. I didn't mean to imply the article was bad, more a comment on me and how I parse things.

My main concern was the plot summary. The rest of it reads pretty easy. I could find some places to tighten up, but honestly, since there is not the multitude of characters and songs, those sections really read fine. I won't parse the rest of it unless you beg me (I end up feeling guilty for being critical anyhow).

One content concern is the Perry Como recording. I think we are missing an aspect of the story (and missed it on the others as well) in not discussing this whole RCA Perry Como thing. The songs came out while the plays were running. It was part of the financing and really the marketing. There were disputes in some cases (can read on them in Billboard). Plus Como is a big name and people will enjoy knowing this connection.TCO (talk) 20:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Can you give me a couple of links?--Wehwalt (talk) 20:10, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Perry Como: [1] and [2]

There was stuff about Como on each of the other plays as well (Google books version of Billboard magazine). I think for Pipe Dream (might have been Allegro) there was some kerfuffle about RCA selling the records too early and they talk about some dispute or even legal action of the RCA and RnH. The whole thing was a total media tie-in and planned from the gitgo. Seems different than some adaption way after the fact.TCO (talk) 20:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, they cross marketed to the max. I've said it before, Rodgers and Hammerstein were very good at making sure they got both sides of the dime.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:03, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

hang in there

Wow, those darned reviewers are not dripping the supports all over you. Still, I think it's just a matter of grinding it out and everyone involved will support. I'm just waiting for the "done" comment to give you mine. As usual, I don't care whether you impliment a specific suggestion or not. I can tell that you've worked on it. Hopefully, it is all for the good of the audience!TCO (talk) 17:23, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. DIdn't know you were waiting. "Done".--Wehwalt (talk) 17:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Turtle coins

I'm just sayin' [3]TCO (talk) 18:36, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

That'll work.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Let me know when you want to do something about this. I'll need to do some research.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Could we get a GA by 01APR? If not, no worries, am a little Wiki burned out anyhow.TCO (talk) 08:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I doubt it. I don't own any books on ancient coins, so it will take a little time there and I will be in Europe the final two weeks of the month.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Interested?

Rebecca Helferich Clarke, a composer, is currently at FAR/C and could use some extra reviewer attention (review page at WP:Featured article review/Rebecca Helferich Clarke/archive1). With your recent musical FAs, I thought this might be something that you would be interested in. If not, no big deal, but any comments at all would be welcome and appreciated. Thanks in advance, Dana boomer (talk) 20:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I have so many promises outstanding that it isn't likely I'll make it this far down the list.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah, oh well. Thanks anyways! Dana boomer (talk) 21:40, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll try. WIth so many having asked and still waiting (well, at least four or five), that's the best I can do.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Kennedy half dollar

Hi Wehwalt. What do you think of trying to get the Kennedy half dollar article on the main page on November 22 if it gets promoted? The date is signifigant and most people will recognize it and understand why the Kennedy half dollar is on the main page on that day.-RHM22 (talk) 20:52, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, why not? I see you took care of those queries, well done. I got my Coin World Almanac, I'm away again but I had time to glance at it, the only thing it has about the Kennedy that we don't is a description of how Roberts went about making the design for the medal, working from an image then going over to the White House to observe Kennedy at work. Nice to have, but not essential for purposes of FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

It sounds like we can just add that bit later when you have more time. By the way, I think I'm going to work on the trade dollar article next. I have a really great image of a sheet music entitled "Trade Dollar March" and I know of some really nice stuff from Harper's Weekly. Do you know of any websites that might have scans from them? If I remember correctly, HW was a Republican paper, so they should be mostly negative about the trade dollar.-RHM22 (talk) 03:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't think of any offhand. Sooner or later, we are going to have to work some arrangement with the ANA or Smithsonian or someone to get image.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:28, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, the Harper's Weekly stuff is just for interesting images such as political cartoons. I should be able to find a trade dollar picture somewhere since there are so many around.-RHM22 (talk) 04:04, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

And what are you planning to do when you hit Gobrecht?--Wehwalt (talk) 04:05, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

That's actually a lot easier than I expected at first. Remember that old book of patterns? It has several nice quality images of the Gobrecht dollar. They're black and white, but the quality looks way better than any of the other images in the book!-RHM22 (talk) 04:09, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Still, it would be nice if we had the luxury of modern images.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

That's true! The ANA is probably the best bet, but I'm not sure if they would go for the OTRS stuff, since they have to allow the images to be used anywhere for any purpose.-RHM22 (talk) 21:02, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Does the ANA make money off coin photos? If not, can't see why they'd care.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I doubt that they make any money from the photos, but some organizations are finicky about them for some reason. I'll also check the World Coin Gallery for images of the trade dollar, because I think that fellow gives permission for coin images.-RHM22 (talk) 18:23, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

sentence case or title case?

For references? (books, articles, web pages)? I was using title until Painted turtle and then was counseled to sentence (even read up on it, it's not just a Tonyism, style guides differ). So have been doing sentence now. But now have counsel to use title. I really don't care (and I think I can dictate what happens on my articles). But mostly, I just want to set a pattern and follow it. Is pretty low value to mess around with this, especially changing stuff back and forth.TCO (talk) 10:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Go with the flow.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Damnit...I knew you would say that. I want to find out what "my flow" is. I could just yield on the point, if there were a strong opponent, or if it were an existing article. I just think it's a matter of deciding what I want and no one will care (that much). I had kinda bought into the sentence case thing earlier. Just want to know what my default should be.TCO (talk) 18:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Writing featured content is satisfying expectations. Always know what is important to you and that, fight for. Like I don't care where the plot is in M &J.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Lots of finger slipping today, eh?

[4], [5], [6], [7]

:)

NW (Talk) 04:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand why there should be rollback on the watchlist page. Shouldn't people at least look at the edits? But it makes it rough on my iPhone.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:31, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

You can see the edits with popups and then rollback it, I guess. Or if you're rollbacking a username like "NW is a fag!" But you're right that it isn't terribly useful. There is a fix though! NW (Talk) 16:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Aussie PM infoboxes

They were quite inconsistant, so I thusly made them consistant. There were 'only' 2 of'em with the GGs in the infobox. GoodDay (talk) 05:23, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

This one's a FA though. And there has been discussion of this on talk. At least use an edit summary!--Wehwalt (talk) 05:23, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted, per FA. For consistancy sake, I may begin 'tommorow' adding the Governors-General, too. PS: The addition of the GGs, makes the infobox look too crowded, though. GoodDay (talk) 05:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps for Menzies, but for Whitlam? There were only two. BTW, if you really feel strongly about it I won't stand in the way.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:34, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I 'might' re-revert (delete the Governors-General) in Whitlam's infobox tommorow, per consistancy. Keeping 27 articles infoboxes consistant would be daunting task. Also, I've noticed that the New Zealand PMs have the Monarch & Governor-General in their infoboxes & yet the Canadian PMs don't have the Governor General in theirs. It would be impossible to keep all the Commonwealth realm PM infoboxes consistant. GoodDay (talk) 06:13, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll leave it to you, as you are looking at the Big Picture then!--Wehwalt (talk) 06:21, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I deleted the governors-general again, for consistancy sake. If it's reverted again (by you or anyone else), I'll likely won't put up much fuss. GoodDay (talk) 06:22, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't plan to change it. This sort of thing seems to plague prime ministers articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: FA nomination for Main Page

You made an offer here that I think I would like to take you up on, assuming it still stands... I am not sure how many point the article would be worth, but it was recorded in June (could be used as an anniversary, if that boosted the points for a summer appearance on the Main Page) and the original album by Judy Garland was released in 1961 (so fifty year anniversary there). This would be my first article to appear on the Main Page, so that's one point as well. Really, I was just hoping for assistance with the formatting and possibly some help with the nomination process. Thanks! --Another Believer _(Talk) 23:25, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I am happy to help. When were you thinking of asking for it to run? Summer? Do you have the release date for the Judy Garland release?--Wehwalt (talk) 02:00, 6 March 2011 (UTC)--Wehwalt (talk) 02:00, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

The concert was recorded on April 23, 1961 and the album released on July 10, 1961. I suppose one of those dates might be appropriate. --Another Believer _(Talk) 07:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

MIght as well start with the earlier one and that way you have a backup. I'll work up a blurb for you tomorrow, forgive me it has been a long day and I need sleep.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:32, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Nooo problem! Take your time. I feel bad--I should be writing up the blurb but I figured some assistance would help since I am not familiar with the formatting aspect. I'll be sure to note that you wrote the summary when I nominate the article for the main page. Thanks again for any help you may be able to offer! --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I will take another look at the nomination process and try to get the ball rolling soon. Much appreciated! --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Frank Buckles (Part 2)

Replied to your post on the talk page. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 18:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Just lighting this up again. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

will deal with it later--Wehwalt (talk) 22:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Okie Dokie. :) I might work on something in my sandbox here in a couple. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 00:53, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

That is fine. Keep in mind this is developing ...--Wehwalt (talk) 07:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Carcharoth moved the, as he called "post-death", information to a section of their own. Since things are changing, him and I decided to leave it "as-is" for the moment unless something changes in the morning. Since I will be up (stupid TMJ migraine), I will keep an eye on the Twitter wires to see if anything new is reported. Right now, it is just rehashings of the same AP story from the 4th. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 07:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about the TMJ, I've had that once, they gave me steroids and it went away. I'm about to go to bed, it is midnight here (I am again on the West Coast) and I've about had it. Frankly, I think at least through the funeral, stuff will change so much that it is almost worth waiting for that. Did he have his picture taken with Bush or Obama or something? Might be worth getting, a call to the White House Photo Office might be in order.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:45, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

You are seriously rackin' up the frequent flier miles, so ya are. :) We have a picture on the page now of him with Bush 43, not sure if he was at the White House with Obama or not, but I can check and get back to you. I am waiting Tribune Media Services' Permissions Group to get back with me on this image. I think that one would be a really great image to use on the page as it is a high quality image and was taken just this past February, I do believe. But if it is copyrighted, we can't. I am hoping it is "non-commercial reuse". I will keep you updated on that one, should hear back from them today. Sleep Well and Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 08:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Certainly, though from my experience with Nixon, the WH photographer takes pictures of everything the president does, that is why he is there ...--Wehwalt (talk) 16:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I did a Google search for "White House Photo Office" and couldn't find a link to them. All I was getting was the Flickr stream and some Wikipedia images that had that listed. Can you point me in the right direction, please? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 00:04, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Did you check the White House web site? It may have changed its name since the days of Nixon; still amazed there is yet no article on Ollie Atkins.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I did, but all it gives me are the same photos from the Flickr stream, I do believe. I will check again though. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 05:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Just looked again and the only two files they have about Buckles are the proclaimation stating US flags worldwide will be lowered to half-staff on the day of his burial and the press release from The President and First Lady. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 05:36, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Always remember there is a world beyond the internet and much can be gotten from a public information office.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:51, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

This is very true. I will give them a call in the morning (forgot yesterday) and will call Tribune again about that one picture. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 06:09, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The best images are the ones you search for, very often. And you make them available to humanity by bringing them online.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:45, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the file moving rights. What a good way to start off the day. :) Much appreciated. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:22, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

no problemo.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:27, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

U.S. state reptiles

Will you please review this article? TCO (talk) 19:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Reading it now.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:26, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Made all the changes you advised. Could you please take another look? For "Use", it may still need work, but please just rewrite it if so.TCO (talk) 03:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Think that thing is close. We are going to stick in the conservation content, but it's really above and beyond. No biggie, though. I would do it after regardless, just like I built picta up even after the star. I am getting the impression they just like to sit and dick around for a while before promoting stuff. Kinda different from what I'm used to in the professional world. (Have had very fast accepts at professional journals, sometimes with no revisions). No biggie. Guess, I can just get the next plane headed down the runway...TCO (talk) 07:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Trade dollar

Hi Wehwalt. There's no rush at all, but after I'm finished with the trade dollar article, could you please go through and sprinkle in a few cites from Breen or Taxay? Right now, the only good reference work I have for that series is the Bowers book, but I don't want it to seem like I'm too dependant on that. Like I said, there's no rush at all, because I probably won't be done with it for at least several days.-RHM22 (talk) 19:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Sunday?--Wehwalt (talk) 20:36, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, that'll be fine. I might not even be done with yet. I'm still looking for some Harper's Weekly stuff for the recepetion section.-RHM22 (talk) 20:41, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Everyone hated it. Easy.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:42, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

To put it lightly! There was a cartoon in an 1874 HW that was titled "Rags for Our Working Men—Specie for the Foreigners" and described how Uncle Sam was creating silver coins for the benefit of the "heathen Chinee". I think the fact that they were sending the coins to China was one of the things that made it so unpopular in a time when there was so much anti-Chinese sentiment. Obviously it wasn't for the benefit of the Chinese at all, but that's probably how some viewed it.-RHM22 (talk) 20:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

By the way, do you think the reviewer wants an image of 1964 proof half dollar or any 1964? I have a few good looking '64s that I could scan if the latter. I also have a regular proof, but it's in the Mint pliofilm so probably won't scan well.-RHM22 (talk) 20:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

No, I think his complaint is that we are showing him the accented hair, but giving him no basis for comparison. Probably Bobby would have been wise to do a larger image that contained something which gave the viewer a good sense of where in Kennedy's hair this is. When you write the section on reaction, my advice would be to let the quotes do the talking. I'm sure you can find quotes that will sound great. What I do is let my own writing become very bland so that the quotes stand out the more!--Wehwalt (talk) 20:59, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

BTW, looks like Laser Brain is doing FAC work right now. Promotions are possible.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:00, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I do that too! I know it's unusual, but I enjoy bland writing. I hate it when you read an interesting story but it's so bogged down with POV that you don't know what's true and what's not. I like the facts presented fairly and without bias. I'm definitely not going to put anything in there about anti-Chinese racism! Just like with the SBA thing, I have no evidence for that claim, just that it seems apparent when taken in context. The trade dollar story is very interesting.

If Sacagawea dollar is promoted, I think I'll nominate Flowing Hair dollar. Obviously it's short, but after looking it over a couple of times, I really think I have included everything that it humanly possible about such an old series. I think people might be interested also because of the illegal goings on in the early days of the Mint.-RHM22 (talk) 21:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I got permission from someone on Flickr for a 1795 dollar image! I've already sent him the OTRS stuff.-RHM22 (talk) 21:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

He has a website too, so there might be some other goodies there that we can get permission for. Here's a link to website: [8]. A lot of the images are from other places, but there are several that he has taken himself.-RHM22 (talk) 21:18, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Go for it. I'll look it over soon. You are getting to be quite the FAC powerhouse.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

It's addictive to try and get articles to FA! I suspect I will slow down tremendously after the dollars are done. I would like do an article on the twenty piece eventually, the worst and least popular coin of all time. It makes the SBA look like a media darling.-RHM22 (talk) 21:37, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

That should be fun. And short!--Wehwalt (talk) 21:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Maybe I'll go for the shortest FAC ever. "The Twenty cent piece was a coin that nobody used."-RHM22 (talk) 21:44, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I think the shortest was one of Ealgyth's horse articles, which was about 10K.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Records says that the shortest FA is Tropical Depression Ten (2005) at around 8.5K.-RHM22 (talk) 21:59, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Horses, hurricanes, whatever.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:08, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

It's the holy Wikitrinity: horses, hurricanes and fungi.-RHM22 (talk) 00:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Not to mention birds, cacti, and the San Marino Naval Vessel Tassahaveni.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:39, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Take a look at the images on Flowing Hair dollar! Can I nominate it for FA while the OTRS is pending?-RHM22 (talk) 01:31, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Helps to know a few people who are OTRS volunteers, it expedites things. I'm working on Flowing Hair Dollar now.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:14, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the file moving rights! That tool is a very good idea. Thanks also for the comments and fixes at Flowing Hair! I'll begin addressing them now.-RHM22 (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

What do you think I should add to with the Flowing Hair article? Do you think the background section or the production needs more flavor? I was thinking probably the background, since it involves so many very famous people.-RHM22 (talk) 19:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, exactly, no one gives a darn about Robert Scot, the articles strengths are the future subjects of Presidential Dollars, and I'm sure you will agree, always write to the article's strengths. Like with the double eagle, the strength was the battle of wills between Roosevelt, Barber, and Saint-Gaudens, and since they were kind enough all of them to leave great quotes, the article wrote itself. That's why I put in the quote from the Washington speech. An unexplored aspect of Washington (to the average Joe) will command interest, and you have Jefferson! Hamilton! How can you go wrong?--Wehwalt (talk) 04:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

What about Albian Cox? Surely he is the subject of many research papers and Google searches.-RHM22 (talk) 04:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Greatest president we never had!--Wehwalt (talk) 05:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Pat_Tillman#Clarifying_for_consensus

Re. Pat Tillman, and the quotation/censorship debate,

In order to clarify, I am asking users to briefly, clearly state which version of the quotation they support or oppose.

Please see Talk:Pat_Tillman#Clarifying_for_consensus

I am sending this message to everyone who has previously participated in the discussion; I do not wish to make any assumptions of the previous opinion.

I want to show clear consensus, so the issue can be resolved and edit-warring can be prevented.

Thanks,

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Chzz (talk) at 00:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC).

File mover

FYI, discussion on file mover. I'm of the opinion that handing out these rights (as they were designated for specifically one purpose originally) should not be given to just any "trusted user" who doesn't work in files much, but I think your take would be appreciated at that page to help determine what makes more sense. Cheers, /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 03:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I looked at the discussion. I think most of the people I gave it to will find a good use for it, but I don't believe userrights should be removed absent cause so I'll take the discussion on board, but don't plan any removals. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:26, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Understood, thanks for looking. Cheers, /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 15:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Unless there is a limited number of such userrights, and unless the trusted users I gave it too totally let me down, which I don't think likely, well! If even one of them uses it properly, Wikipedia will have gained. Net positive analysis says +. Next time, if there is a strong feeling it should be restricted, someone needs to drop a note to admins, though I don't see that strong feeling, I see a couple of people. No one I have given rollbacker or reviewer to has abused it either.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Deference

I'd forgotten about this. Indeed, "defer" was the term used and it is a very apt one. Thank you! --Pete (talk) 15:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I should have included it in the first place.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:28, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Peace at last

I have parked Tom Driberg at peer review, and there it will rest awhile. I have alerted some hardcore reviewers to give it a going over, please feel free to join them. So now, having refreshed myself with a non-musical subject, I'm back in line with Nixon in China. If it's all right with you, I'll begin in usual style by working on the plot synopsis and the musical analysis. You are no doubt occupied with other projects, so I'll just trundle away for the present; you can come in with your parts when you're ready. We can use User:Brianboulton/Sandbox5 as a noticeboard. Brianboulton (talk) 23:32, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

That is fine, but expect that I will cut in to your parts of the article given I have the two paper sources, and of course, you should feel free to do the same. Or I can put a summary in my sandbox and you could work from that. Right now, I'm just reviewing and helping out. I have nothing prepared after my current FACs clear, and will probably put in a couple of intensive days to try to finish up Macdonald early next week and try to get old John A. to PR. I have him up to the early 1880s, so another decade and then an assessment section. I'll start reviewing the NiC sources next day or two.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not worried about you cutting in to my text on the basis of print sources I don't have - it's a joint project. You can always email your sources to me, if they're not too long. Brianboulton (talk) 17:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I could scan them, but I don't think it will be necessary. We'll work it through. I hope to start on it late next week and will give Driburg a look too.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Frank Buckles (Part 3)

Overnight, I have done alot of updating to the page, including adding a couple new pictures (one of which had to be deleted, damn). I, also, put the article up for GA, but they are on a major backlog, so it might be awhile. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'll look through it again when I get the chance. I am juggling a lot of plates right now and not every article is getting as much time as I'd like to put into it.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

No worries, no rush either. I just wanted to keep you informed. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

White House Photo Office

Called the White House switchboard and apparently the Photo Office doesn't have a photo number, website or email address. I would actually have to write to the White House for that information. Well, since they would take forever and a day, I will just wait for Obama's Presidential Library. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 17:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Speaking of Obama, it's too bad that no one made a DYK for his father, Barack Obama, Sr. I'll bet "...that Barack Obama was a muslim socialist born in Kenya?" would have gotten a lot of views.-RHM22 (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Or how about "'...that George W. Bush was of African descent?"-RHM22 (talk) 18:48, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

"...that Bill Clinton spent four years presiding over Chelsea?"-RHM22 (talk) 18:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

ouch. Well you tried. RHM I was talking about background. On my iPhone will answer both with more later.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:25, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, 'tis cool. I kinda expected that would happen. Pre-Obama information is easy to find with the many Presidential Libraries. Kinda like your many articles about Nixon, you just went through his Prez. Lib. (my new name for "Presidential Library"). I'm sure if something was taken, it will be released soon. Oh and Wehwalt, check your email in about 5 minutes. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 03:33, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Read, and I'll look into it. They love me at the Nixon Library, they went out of their way to be helpful. They even advised me to get a scanner instead of a camera, which has worked out quite well. Still, there's got to be a way on the White House thing, I'll think about it. Incidently, I'm planning to do serious work on the Nixon article itself probably in May and June. The Nixon Centennial is coming up in less than two years and getting that to FA is going to be a challenge.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

If anyone can get an article to FA, it is you. I wasn't around for the Nixon era, but if you need some help, let me know. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 04:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, that is one reason I am building my self confidence with these FAs. Everyone has an opinion on Nixon. And I was around for the Nixon era, though too young to vote.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:28, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

That's what is great about not living through that era, I can't have one. :) I understand both sides (to an extent), but have no opinion one way or the other. Now, my parents, that's a different story. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 04:33, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. No one was neutral about Nixon who is old enough to remember him. Personally, I believe him a great but flawed man who worked hard in the final twenty years of his life to overcome Watergate and I'd have to say succeeded as well as anyone could.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

He passed away in...*looks*...1994. That is right about when I started watching the news, learning more about the world outside my own backyard. I was 13, so just figuring out what was going on in the grand scheme of things. So, I kinda just know about the stuff I read in History class, not the "Post-Watergate" stuff. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 07:52, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

(od)Sigh. You know you are starting to watch the sun move down the sky when they talk about "history" about the stuff you lived through ... one day you'll be talking to the post-9/11 generation who will have little understanding ... I regret I never met or saw Nixon. We lived in the next town over and while I was in college my younger brothers saw him at the store in Saddle River, where he lived.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:12, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Same with Frank Buckles. He lived about 15 miles north of me, was afraid to call his spokesperson and ask if it was OK to come for a visit (apparently he allowed alot of people to just come on by). Now, too late, gone. To be honest, my greatest brush with Presidential fame is getting a direct email from Obama before he was elected. I will forward it to you, kinda neat. I was asking about how he would help some of the areas that needed money for mental health services, he wrote back. I think it was on a Blackberry, cause you can see the tab marks on the email. Still neat. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 06:27, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree, neat. I have never had the attention of any President, although I've seen three (Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton). Most of the people I've written about, I'd love to meet. I only have one FA about a person known to be alive (Scalia) (Natalee Holloway is disappeared). I don't know if I'd want to meet him, though, he is a rather overwhelming person. Oddly enough, my handyman also works for him and he's told me a couple of stories (nothing unfavorable, just funny) that I can't repeat, obviously on the Web.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:00, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but watching Japan coverage all morning and helping a meteorologist friend at WUSA-TV. The most famous person I have met was Aaron Tippin, who had stopped at a Bob Evans I was working at at the time. Got an autograph. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 16:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

On the rollback matter, I thought about what you said, and yes, I could have a declared sock in that manner which would not be a rollbacker, but keeping my watchlist coordinated would be a horror.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:10, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that would always be a problem. You could talk with User:Xeno and see how he works it. I figure it would just be a complete copy and paste of his existing Watchlist. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 19:13, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that would work. The raw watchlist. Hmm. Do you think I can conom FAC's with myself?--Wehwalt (talk) 19:19, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey, ya never know. :) I wouldn't be surprised if it were allowed. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 19:20, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Just to get around the one article at a time rule ...--Wehwalt (talk) 19:25, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Jets Uniforms, Logos

Can you give the article another going over before I make it live? I added a few things in there as well as the references. Thanks. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 21:59, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

OK. Might be a couple of days.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Also added the lede and a gallery as well. Figured it look much cleaner than the current arrangement. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 15:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I got distracted by other things. I'll run through it. I was thinking of nomming our article for TFA on the first day of the season (if ever) but as things stand, that's the 10th anniversay of 9/11, so that ain't happening, unless the Jets play Monday night again.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

It's alright, I'm not in a great rush; once I finish this I need to rework the Broadcasting/Cheerleading squad parts of the article then I want to get some peer review and hopefully have a successful experience at FAC. As for our article, whenever the season does start, I would maybe nom it about a week or so in. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 23:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, I went ahead. Sorry about the delay. Pity you can't illustrate the changes or it would make a good list.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:40, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help! -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 23:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Send me a link once it is online.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

What do you think? -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 00:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Fine work!--Wehwalt (talk) 00:32, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Progress Club

Hi Wehwalt. I just wanted to get your opinion on something. I found a scan of an 1881 sheet music entitled "Trade Dollar March". The music is dedicated the Progress Club of Brooklyn New York. I wasn't able to find much information about it, so I decided to see if you know anything about them. Firstly, do you think the name refers to the Progressive movement in the United States? It's from 1881, which is pretty early, but it's not implausible that the word "progressive" couldn't have been used in a political context at that point. Secondly, if it was Progressive politically, do you think that they would have supported the trade dollar? It seems to me that Progressive politicians would support the trade dollar and conservatives would not, but I'm not positive on that. I'm not sure if I'm going to include the scan in the article or not, since I'm not really sure it would add anything other than an interesting image.-RHM22 (talk) 04:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it had anything to do with the Progressive Movement in particular, but was probably in sympathy with its goals. I find a reference to Henry George speaking there, that indicates to me that it was a liberal organization. Perhaps its name was inspired by the famous Reform Club of London. I need to review Breen and Taxay before giving you views on the political ramifications of the Trade dollar!--Wehwalt (talk) 05:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Maybe call the ANA library? They may know something about the march or be interested.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea! Actually, I'm starting to think that Progressives might have been against the trade dollar. Harper's Weekly, which ran several anti-trade dollar cartoons, was later a forum for Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.-RHM22 (talk) 14:11, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

That's an awfully thin reed to rest that on, but yes, any stick does to beat a dog with and if they were a liberal publication in an era of Republican dominance ... have you figured out whether the Trade dollar is legal tender? Some say its status as such was revived by the Coinage Act of 1965.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Yup, it's legal tender now. Section 102 of the Coinage Act of 1965 says "All coins and currencies of the United States (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations), regardless of when coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private, public charges, taxes, duties, and dues." I think this was done to override the section of the Constitution that says that it's unlawful to issue any money not backed by gold or silver. The tricky question is what the legal tender value of the coins is. The Coinage Act of 1873 made them legal tender up to $5, but they were later redeemed for a dollar each.-RHM22 (talk) 15:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Didn't that override the various statutes which placed limits on legal tender of coins? I would imagine, in theory, they are legal tender for $1 in unlimited amounts ("all" debts)--Wehwalt (talk) 15:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

That's what I would guess, but I'm not positive. I don't think even they knew for sure about that, since the trade dollar probably didn't even cross their minds when drafting the legislation.-RHM22 (talk) 16:00, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. It is only us people interested in numismatic history and hypotheticals, going back and reconstructing.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:11, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Do you know anything about the New York Times using the trade dollar reverse for its logo? Bowers says they used it years after the coin went out of production.-RHM22 (talk) 22:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

The trade dollar article is now in the mainspace at Trade dollar (United States coin) if you're interested. I need to find some suitable pictures for sure.-RHM22 (talk) 03:00, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll look at it when I get a chance. Wish I had some suggestions on images.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:08, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure I'll be able to find an image somewhere. You don't know anything about the NYT logo, do you? I'm thinking about adding that somewhere to the article, but not if there's no image to go along with it.-RHM22 (talk) 20:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

No, I haven't seen it but if you can find an image, it is PD as it was no doubt published before 1923. I probably have seen it and just don't remember it. What years was it used in?--Wehwalt (talk) 20:39, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't know, he doesn't say. It just says "Many years ago [the book was written in 1993] the New York Times adopted the trade-dollar eagle for use as a corporate trademark".-RHM22 (talk) 20:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I know I've seen a coffee-table book with famous front pages from the Times from 1851 to present (MEN LAND ON MOON); that might include it from the era. I do not think I kept it when my father died, or I'd do a scam. But perhaps a local library would have it.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll see what I can find.-RHM22 (talk) 16:46, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

If it was on the masthead, it was gone by 1898, see here. And after 1881--Wehwalt (talk) 16:52, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Apparently the "masthead" is better termed the "nameplate". Very interesting page here but no mention of any association with the Trade dollar.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm starting to think that the eagle might not have ever been on the paper itself. Perhaps the NYT used it on their stock certificates or letterhead, but not on the paper.-RHM22 (talk) 18:04, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Or corporate seal ...--Wehwalt (talk) 18:59, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I e-mailed the NYT, so we'll see what they have to say about it. I might be able to find an image online somewhere if I just knew what to call the symbol, if it was even used at all. It's possible that another paper, like the New York Herald (I believe that's what it was called).-RHM22 (talk) 01:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Come to think of it, wasn't there a newspaper called the Brooklyn Eagle?-RHM22 (talk) 01:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Certainly was.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I didn't find anything about the eagle design, but I did find a neat free archive of the Brooklyn Eagle from 1842 to 1902, here. It might prove useful.-RHM22 (talk) 01:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

They may say something about the Trade dollar. I plan, btw to look through my sources tomorrow. I spent all day getting John A. Macdonald in reasonable shape.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

There's no rush. I can't do anything with the article I find some photos anyway.-RHM22 (talk) 02:05, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments and fixes! It looks really good now.-RHM22 (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done yet. I'm also leaving you the scutwork of going over and fetching those references from one of the other coin articles, resolving contradictions, checking for disambigs.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, that's what I've got. I think the article is off to a very good start and you are to be commended. I'd find an outrageous quote or two about the abuses of the trade dollar. I'll look too.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:18, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! This my favorite dollar coin article yet. I believe I saw some quotes somewhere. Let me see what I can find.-RHM22 (talk) 17:09, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

You have Breen's Encylopedia, right? There is a great quote in there about the trade dollar. He says that the trade dollar was "an expensive mistake – its motivation mere greed, its design a triumph of dullness, its domestic circulation and legal tender status a disastrous provision of law leading only to ghastly abuses." I found the quote online, but it would be better to use the original source rather than a secondary.-RHM22 (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I used a small part of that quote, it is ref name = "b466"/ . If you can use it better, then please do and delete mine. On the same page, Breen also says that the 1884s were made for WIlliam Idler, whom he describes as "for over two decades the Mint's appropriately named fence for restrikes and fantasy coins." You can often check quotes against google books, even a snippet quote will be good enough for attribution purposes.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:40, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't remember where we had the discussion, but Taxay confirms that the half disme was to be struck in .892 silver. Because section 9 of the Mint Act of 1792 said that was the proper fineness for half dismes. Page 66.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

That is surprising! I never read a lot about them, but I always thought they were sterling silver rather than the legal fineness. In that case, they were almost certainly intended as a regular issue and not just a pattern. If it was a pattern, they never would have gone through the trouble of creating the somewhat complicated silver alloy that was prescribed by the Coinage Act.-RHM22 (talk) 17:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

This whole thing was a comedy of errors. I'm reading Breen. They totally misasayed the Spanish dollars.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

From what I can gather, they assayed the most recent Spanish dollars, which were debased. They then assayed older coins, and gathered the average from both. So basically, they calculated the average of a regular coin worth a dollar and a debased coin worth less than a dollar. To top it off, they used an illegal purity, which ripped off bullion depositors.-RHM22 (talk) 18:14, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've put in what looked interesting.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:35, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! It looks great now and a lot more interesting. I just could not find any good stuff to add.-RHM22 (talk) 22:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Tomorrow's TFA

Thanks for giving me the heads up that Grand Coulee was on deck for tomorrow. I can't edit the blurb but I thought mentioning the Third Powerplant and its construction date twice was a little excessive and some sentences could be combined; it seems kinda choppy. Can any admin edit them or does it have to be Raul?--NortyNort (Holla) 21:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC) I have to get ready for work now, but I made some edits to the blurb here.--NortyNort (Holla) 21:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Admins do but it is best to run it by Raul.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Done. In the future, though, don't wait for me to pre-approve edits to the blurbs if something is already on the main page or going to be there soon -- I probably don't see it in time. (If I disagree, I'll revert you). Raul654 (talk) 17:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

turtle farming GA?

I just saw you were behind. Just give this a quick, look see and your opinion on what content is needed and how to go after it. Easy-peasy.

I think I am going to try to get that article up to GA. First order of business is to think through what content ought to be in there, then the organization. It has a region by region org right now, which is probably the most fundamental cut of the industry. I would like to either find or assemble an overall market size and then some segmentation (by region and turtle type, I think). Maybe more on methods. Can you take a look at it and give any advice (particularly on what content should exist)?

I have no idea what is out there research-wise. Anticipate it not being an easy, translate a market study type thing, but more of an assembly of various sources into a picture. But I'll find out, I guess.

Also, any views on good models of an article that is an industry overview?

TCO (talk) 19:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

P.s. I found an arty turtle topic as well: "Bixi (tortoise)". TCO (talk) 19:29, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

When I can.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

No sweat, man. Low pri and take care of other things first. I can figure it out. Also, I've added some significant content to the [state reptile]] article, but again, really low priority. Just informing you, since you gave a support.TCO (talk) 22:19, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Peer review request

If you have the time and the inclination I should be most grateful for any input on the Thomas Beecham peer review. I should like to get it up to FA standard and all suggestions will be gladly received. There is no hurry about this. Tim riley (talk) 17:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll put it on the list but I am way behind and no telling when I will get to it.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. Meanwhile a drive-by editor has thought fit to close the PR after less than 2 days and has, for some inexplicable reason, nominated the article for FA. I have naturally opposed the nomination as premature (some might also say discourteous, but let it pass) and will get the PR reinstated as soon as I can. Meanwhile, sorry you are being mucked about by this other editor. Tim riley (talk) 10:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Image Question

Would it be possible to take a screenshot of a C-SPAN video in lieu of an actual image and if so would that screenshot be fair-use or non fair-use? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:15, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't know for sure what the status of CSPAN is. You might want to research.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:19, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Status as in how? Like Government, network? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:32, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Government. I assume they have copyright on what they do because I've never seen CSPAN mentioned as a source for images.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:50, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it is owned by National Cable Satellite Corporation (cable companies), it just shows government programming. The reason I want to use it as an image is I can't find a non-copyrighted image of Frank Buckles lying in honor. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:30, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

My gut reaction is that fair use won't survive review. My best suggestion is to try to get a release from someone who put one on Flikr.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:34, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

• Well, I found what I was looking for. A DoD photo of Buckles lying in honor. We can use this under {{PD-USGov}}. I just have one question, in this section, which would look better? 1- The Photo; 2- The Quote; 3- The Photo and the quote. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 23:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I think the image. But I suspect the text will expand and both will fit comfortably!--Wehwalt (talk) 23:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

They did and looks great. Just gotta work on the lede and it is done. Hell, I think at this point it is FA quality to be honest. Give it a look-see. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 00:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

26 hours of non-stop editing is completely. Thanks for your help today. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 01:15, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I think I will have some time tomorrow. I've seen your unceasing labors on this. Well done.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Not to interrupt, but I really like your article, and I cannot think of a better subject to write about. Not sure if you're interested or not, but I came across an interesting photo on the DoD website. It shows the unveiling of the official Frank Buckles portrait. You should be able to use it, because the photographer has apparently released it. Here's the link.-RHM22 (talk) 01:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I think the copyright tag for your image is this: {{PD-USGov-Military-Army}}.-RHM22 (talk) 02:07, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey RHM, I saved the image to my computer and will check it out in full tomorrow and see if it is useable on the page, since it is pretty packed with images as it is. If not, we could probably use it elsewhere, just not sure where at this moment. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 02:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, don't bother if you can't find any use for it. There is no greater "wikipleasure" than an article where there are too many images to fit!-RHM22 (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh yeah, that is the kinda of article you love. I may have to use it though. Commons is having some concerns over the image in the infobox. Some say it is from the Buckles Family, some say Library of Congress, others say the Army, still others the Pentagon (myself included), and still others say they aren't sure. Some say PD, some say fair use, some say government. It's confusing. No matter the side, it is looking like it will be removed from Commons, which removes it from Wikipedia. If that happens, I will be able to move some things around and use it. We will wait and see. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 02:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

That seems odd, since the photo is from 1917. It doesn't matter if it is PD in England or not, because the Wikipedia servers are in the United States. Now, if it's not PD in the country of origin (England), you can't upload it to Commons, but it should be fine if it's just on Wikipedia.-RHM22 (talk) 02:33, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but it is the publication date that governs, not the date it was taken.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I forgot about that. I guess a photograph doesn't count as an artistic work?-RHM22 (talk) 03:01, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Upon closer inspection, that doesn't work either. I'm sure there aren't any records as to who took the photo.-RHM22 (talk) 03:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I am awaiting to see what Commons does with an exact image, just under a different name, before I decide what to do with the image on here. Since we have FUR notices on the image here on Wikipedia, we have it sourced, and other tags, I think it is safe. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 12:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Good! I really like that image, and I hope it's allowed to stay on the article.-RHM22 (talk) 03:04, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

You Earned It

This user helped promote Frank Buckles to good article status.

- Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Wehwalt. You have new messages at Neutralhomer's talk page.
Message added 22:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Response to reversion on my Nixon edit

Hi. I'm somewhat new at Wiki editing so please excuse any newbie errors. I understand you may be an editor and therefore have a Wiki authority to summarily undo and then fix later, although I find that irritating since, in my view, you ought not to revert if you can't fix it at the same time. It's not as if I wrote some unsourced and obvious vandalism. In any event, to your criticisms: Your reversion says that "elipses are not acceptable on such a sensitive quote. I'll deal more with this when I have more time". The ellipses were in the original (from Perlstein's book). They were not put in by me. And you also deleted my sources which should be listed in any listing of Books on this President. And, yeah, he had a potty mouth. That's just the way he rolled. kraljevica (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC) Alexandanu

I'm not involved in this article, and I have no opinion on whether or not the quote should be included. I did want to add, though, that it appears as if the em dash (—) is probably what was intended, as ellipses are usually meant to denote that a section of speech has been removed from the quote.-RHM22 (talk) 21:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

That is what concerns me. Please keep in mind, Alexandanu (and welcome to the wiki) that the quote is in there to prove a point, that Nixon was anti-Semitic. That's what Perlstein is trying to prove there. There is text missing, and this is a highly controversial point. Perlstein is not the original for that comment, most or all of Nixon's tapes are publicly available. I could not fix it because I personally do not have the rest of that comment, but it can't be included piecemeal. The fact that he chose to cut with ellipses to prove a point doesn't mean that we should, we have a higher standard. I would have no objection to the original of it without the ellipses, that is, with the missing text supplied. I suggest googling with the words in the speech. And when I have a moment, I'm going to change "anti-Semitic comments" to "comments deemed by some to be derogatory towards Jews." And yes, I am fully aware that Nixon used expletives, which were famously deleted. The Nixon article is a mess, I intend to spend time getting it in order, hopefully in May.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

The Virginia Repukes were against the box turtle, and then Republicans for Reptiles was formed to lobby them...and they got enough Republicans...but the Democraps went off the reservation and shot down the state reptile. Looks like both sides don't have their priorities straight. Can't even trust these guys to stay bought.

All that said, I hate the box turtle as a choice. Especially the North Carolina tie-in. Painted turtle would be better (yeah a lot of other states use it, but none in the Southeast and none are so much associated with it...plus it is friskier and better looking). We could do a rattlesnake, but WV is using it. That said, it has a tie-in with 1775 militia flags and the like. Copperhead has bad connotations. I think water moccasins are cool, but they aren't that popular and really only occur in a small part of the state. Terrapin is too Marylandish. Some kids class was pushing for the loggerhead sea turtle, but it really doesn't do that much in VA and is more appropriate for SC and FL. Really, I think I could get C. picta throught eh process. There is even a regional VA name for them (skilpot). Legislators eat crap like that up. I'm kind of thinking out loud, but either rattlesnake or painted turtle seem best for VA.

Not certain Nixon had definite views on reptiles. I'm sure he was used to iguanas and snakes and so forth, growing up in semirural LA County.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I remember living in Sand Dog. Brought my little gf over to some friend's house and she freaks when a well over 2 foot (I kid you not) lizard comes running under the futons. Turns out, there are alligator lizards all over Point Loma. And the house was an old bungalow that had a section of patio built into an extension. And the lizards thought that still counted as outdoors!TCO (talk) 20:21, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

like this except way fatter and bigger...damned thing looked like a mini alligator...it wuz a big un!

That's funny. Yes, so much of the interesting wildlife is further south. I'm afraid wildlife around me is rather tame.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:31, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Back to Canada

That's wonderful news, and I'm honoured. What are we looking at in terms of time frames? I would love to help but I'm just absolutely swamped with work, as I'm just finishing up the last semester of my undergrad. - The Fwanksta (talk) 23:22, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, right now I am waiting for more views on the article. It needs work especially on the legacy section. I'd like to get it to FAC in the next few weeks, certainly. I'm grateful for whatever time you can spare. Connormah suggested a while back that it would be good to have another PM article available for main page on Canada Day.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:27, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you kindly, expert, and I mean it!

Go Wiki! Go reptiles! Go USA!

Thanks for the attention on our little page. Very helpful to the process and a joy to engage with the best of the best. Plus...HA! Another star.

Anyhoo...thanks again, old man!

TCO (talk) 23:41, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:46, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Nixon in China

Per the note I have left in Sandbox 5, I am off the internet at present, except for occasional visits to my town library. There is a serious telecoms problem affecting my house, and it may still be some days before this is resolved. So at present I am very limited in what I can do; no reviews, no responses to Driberg review comments, and work on N in C restricted. I posted the N in C music section before the breakdown, and have just posted a revised plot synopsis. I'll continue to do what I can - sorry I can't respond immediately to your copyedit request. Brianboulton (talk) 14:29, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Good luck. This too will pass.

It has passed, I'm glad to say. I have some catching-up to do - can you let me know how you stand at the moment on N in C, also if you are still looking to me for review or copyedit per above (I've forgotten the article). In a day or so I will be fully up to speed; I have meantime left my responses to your Driberg comments. Brianboulton (talk) 19:05, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I am glad. I plan to start work tonight, once I dispose of a promised review, and take a second look at Driberg, it is next on my agenda. Kennedy half dollar, my joint work with RHM22, has just passed (and promoted by Sandy) without need for your intervention, which is a good thing in its way. Which means, unusually, I have nothing at FAC. John A. Macdonald will be next at FAC but I am not in a hurry to list it there, though I will have to fairly soon to assure I will have if necessary two bites at the apple before a possible 1 July TFA.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:13, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I see nothing in Driberg that requires further comment. My purpose in making comments is to say "have you thought about". If you have, that's all that is needed!--Wehwalt (talk) 20:13, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Wood Buckles

Perhaps you could chime in again on this section. There have been a couple responses and I am not sure how to respond to them. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 13:31, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Question for ya: is Ancestry.com a reliable source? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 17:25, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Shameless stalking

Putting in my small contribution between your authoritative comments on Queen Victoria emboldens me to ask if you might have time to cast an eye over Thomas Beecham at PR, before I take it to FAC. If not, perhaps I could ask you to add your thoughts when I take it to FAC. Very glad of your thoughts on it either way. Tim riley (talk) 20:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I will look at it, but it may be several days.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

request ban

Wehwalt, please ban me for a month. TCO (talk) 23:44, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

You know it doesn't work that way.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:36, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I actually DON'T know it doesn't work that way. Other forums have always banned me on request. Oh well.

Well, read up on it. We don't do on request blocks. Why, anyway? Or perhaps you would rather email me on that one ?--Wehwalt (talk) 03:45, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Congrats

Congrats on the promotion of the Kennedy half dollar article. It's a really good read and it's nice to see the information behind what I was blindly collecting in the 70's and 80's. I think I'm a collector and not a hoarder. :) --Andy Walsh (talk) 18:06, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Glad to hear it! I must admit, I put aside a couple of bicentennial half dollars a few weeks ago. It's an interesting topic and I enjoyed doing it. ... RHM22 is a strong contender for rookie of the year, no? Along with my other talk page stalkers!--Wehwalt (talk) 18:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

When you add up all the FAs either written or inspired by Wehwalt, it'd probably be about half of them.-RHM22 (talk) 19:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Flattery, flattery. Just updated Saint-Gaudens double eagle with the new Coin World btw--Wehwalt (talk) 19:11, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

That guy who paid $7 million for that 1933 double eagle is going to upset if they allow those people to keep their 10.-RHM22 (talk) 20:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I expect this will eventually be settled in the appellate courts. Whoever loses is bound to appeal. I'm tempted to go up to Philly for a day during the trial just to watch it.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:11, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I suppose that no pictures are allowed in courtrooms, or else that would be a great addition to the 1933 double eagle article!-RHM22 (talk) 20:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I think that's the default. What I ought to do is go up there before the trial and ask to look at the filed exhibits. I don't have any immediate plans to go to Philly right now though. I'd love to read Burdette's report.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Would they actually let someone see the coins? That would be sensational.-RHM22 (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

No, doubt if they would file the coins. I think the mint exhibited them at the ANA a few years ago. I really meant the paper stuff, the history.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I see. That probably would be available to anyone. I think stuff like that is considered public record.-RHM22 (talk) 20:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure. It's probably digitalized too. I need to do some research, but I don't think you can view stuff like that from home yet.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

What do you think of this image? I wonder if it's PD or not. It would be a wonderful picture for the Jefferson nickel article if so.-RHM22 (talk) 01:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Here and here are photos of one of the proposed designs from Flickr. They're not freely licensed, but still neat looking.-RHM22 (talk) 01:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

As Schlag was not a federal employee, a copyright was created, and either his estate or the Federal Government holds it. Either way, we would have to come up with a fair use rationale.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Do you think the photo of them examining the designs would be ok? I'm not sure if it's federal government or not.-RHM22 (talk) 13:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, if we can show that it is Federal, or that the copyright was not renewed.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The Jefferson nickel design selection photo is good to use, according to this page. Apparently the copyright has expired on all the Harris & Ewing photos in the collection.-RHM22 (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, that is good. Are you on board for Peace dollar when I get home weekend after next? If not, I can certainly do a non-numismatic article next. Except for the current opera project I'm working on with Brian, I have nothing for FAC. I don't plan to do any more musicals, so I'm pretty open right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, but I won't have any really good references yet. I have VAM, which covers the Peace dollar pretty well. It shouldn't be a problem since you have Burdette though. Those books seem to be among the best.-RHM22 (talk) 18:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Unrelated, but do you ever get those brochures and stuff from the Mint in the mail? I started keeping those recently. It seems like they might come in handy some time.-RHM22 (talk) 19:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but I've never bothered to keep them. I will start looking at them now. I don't often order from the Mint. Did you know they have a program for people to get Sac and Presidential dollars in $250 lots for face value, and they eat the postage and you can use a credit card? They've put limits on it now, they had people cycling them to the banks and building up frequent flier mileage. They want you to spend them, or at least use them in vending machines or self serve at the supermarket (I adore self serve).--Wehwalt (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't order much from them either, but they keep sending me the brochures and stuff. I noticed that program, but I never ordered any. I like the self serve too, except when the 90 year old lady is in front with a huge cart full of stuff that takes 40 minutes to scan.-RHM22 (talk) 21:28, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, though the elderly are slow adopters of such things. My mom always preferred full service lanes. One interesting thing. I was in the UK, and they now have self serve that you don't feed the coins in one at a time, there is a little metal bowl and you can just dump as many coins in there as you like and it gives you change in notes if you put that many coins in. I sometimes travel to the UK with UK coins acquired at a discount, and this makes it easy to cash them in, saves bagging (they use little plastic bags rather than rolls in the UK) and taking to a bank.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

That's really unusual. I thought that the UK did use rolls! For a while, I collected bank rolls of Euro coins. I was able to trade with some collectors, and I got one roll each of 1, 5 and 10 Eurocents from both Slovenia and Germany.-RHM22 (talk) 03:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

(od) The continent uses rolls for euro coins, though I'm not certain all countries do. UK uses small plastic bags, which they weigh to check the number of coins. As copper and "silver" predecimal coins could be weighed en masse, I guess this evolved. I have obsolete special weights that were used on balances for a certain quantity of coin, nowadays, it's all digital.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, being presently in Germany, I had a small quantity of DM coins, which I took to the local branch of the Bundesbank and got euros for. I've done that a number of times (I tend to troll junk boxes at coin shops, and also know a few dealers who supply me with coin to take overseas at a discount). What is nice is that almost always, if you have 2 euro or more coming in coin, they give you a commemorative 2 euro coin.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:11, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Mein Deutsche Münzsammlung ist sehr klein, and so is my understanding of the German language. I learned most of the basic numismatic words so I could read German auction catalogs.-RHM22 (talk) 20:10, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

By the way, what would you think about a comparison photo showing the different obverses of the Kennedy half dollar? Maybe a 1964, one from the 1970s when they altered the design, and one from the '90s when they lowered the relief.-RHM22 (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

We would have to mention it in the article that they changed the relief. Not discouraging, just saying. I also have very few German coins, they do not interest me. I bought a thaler to illustrate Ernest Augustus I of Hanover.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:53, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

That's true. I'm not sure if I have any sources for various minor design changes over the years. That's a nice thaler! I have a couple of German coins, but I was never really interested in them.-RHM22 (talk) 17:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I will look at Tomaska when I get home. Odds are he says something.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:35, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

It's nothing to do with the design changes, but I did find some interesting quotes here.-RHM22 (talk) 18:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Wehwalt. You have new messages at Neutralhomer's talk page.
Message added 20:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hey, Wehwalt, remember me?

Hi, Wehwalt! I'd like if you could close this account, please. I am using Mountain Girl mainly from now on. I check on this account once in a while. Just reply on either one of the talk pages. Thanks!CamrynRocks! ^{|Live life} 23:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CamrynRocks! (talk • contribs)

Why? Yes, you are only allowed one account but given the past concerns, I'd like a bit more information.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:07, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Tom Driberg

Just to let you know I have nominated Driberg at FAC. Thanks for your help at the peer review. Brianboulton (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I'll weigh in when I remember. No great hurry.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:40, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Note: As a result of someone's hamfistedness, Driberg has been accidentally deleted from the FAC page. I hope it will be back soon! Brianboulton (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I believe it is back now. I found it on the list.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:12, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

John A. Macdonald

Copyedit from my talk page: "I've taken John A. Macdonald to FAC. While there is little aviation content in it, given your interest in Canadian articles generally, I'm hopeful you'll give it a review. Thanks for your help.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

One suggestion and it is because the bibliography template for books does not allow editions to be given and puts the date of publication next to the author; do you mind a slight rehashing of the awful APA style guide to at least correct this? I will change one bibliographic record to show you the change. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC).

Sure. Feel free.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:17, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, at least the date will be given as part of the publishing information, not part of the author's note, which never makes sense, as publishers not authors make the decision as to revised or updated editions. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:20, 27 March 2011 (UTC).

Another area that I noted is a mishmash of Harvard citation style; do you mind a change to a consistent style? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:22, 27 March 2011 (UTC).

Not in the least! Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Question or The Never-Ending Thread

Since you only helped behind the scenes, do you think you could do a peer review on the Frank Buckles article? If so, please let me know. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:21, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

User:ResidentAnthropologist has taken up the PR cause. Thanks though. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 18:30, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll give some comments anyway. I'm sorry, you're too fast for me.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, I asked a couple people, but if you can do it today, I can let RA know. He would only be able to do it tomorrow and I would kinda like to get to the FA process quickly, cause that is where the real waiting happens. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 19:17, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Right now, I'm working on a couple of things, but I'll try to get to it in a bit. I am presently in the UK and it is 8 pm here already.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Dude, seriously, put down the luggage and back away from the airplane slowly. You fly too much. :) I will let RA know that you will be working on it and he can throw in information he thinks should be added as well. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 19:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I hate flying, seriously. I feel better about it with a couple of drinks in me. Come May 31, which is the end of two tours from now, I intend to sit home for a good long time.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:00, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Tours? What are you, a rocker? :) Wehwalt, the Wiki Rockstar. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Read further down my userpage.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Cool! So you are a rocker!...kinda. That's neat! If you ever get associated with Metallica, Linkin Park, or Alice in Chains, let me know. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Kinda. I just hang out, take photos, and post a few on Wiki. I'm an honorary rocker. I can't even read music.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:24, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Honorary is better than nothin'. :) Hey, I worked on a good portion of the posts you made on the PR, but this damned TMJ migraine is kickin' my ass, so I am going to put a hot washrag on my head and lay down for a couple. Will be back soon, though. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. Take your time, it is your article.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Had a good nap, still have a slight migraine, but I have updated most of the information you suggested. There are two pieces still left to be updated. One I am waiting on someone from WP:MILITARY and two, I need someone to give the one section a look-see as I am a chronology writer, so I don't know how to not write that way. Am hoping a different set of eyes could help with that. I did switch some of the "On date" sentences around so they were the same each paragraph, but I am not sure if it is still reading like a timeline or not. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 08:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Glad you are feeling better. I see Materialscientist is busy copyediting, I will wait until he is done to look at it again. You will learn to write a little less chronologically (not that this is in itself a bad thing), I got the same criticisms during the review process of Holloway.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:15, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :) Just good ol' barometric pressure goofin' with my jaws, just like it does with some people's knees and other joints. I did a little tinkering as well on one of his suggestions and await his further edits to see if I need to tinker further. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 09:22, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm hopeful that as more feature stories come out about Buckles, you'll be able to fill in more about what was a very long lifetime. Perhaps his daughter will talk more.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:25, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I figure she will after a period of time and I will be able to post more. I figure when this biography and documentary comes out, we will have even more information, but that isn't until "late 2011 or early 2012", so I am not waiting for that. We have plenty of information for the moment. Just wish there was some "early life" information. Like who his parents were, any siblings, etc. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 09:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Exactly, plus what battles he drove at, that kind of thing. I imagine he was assigned as an ambulance driver because someone couldn't bear the thought of sending such a young kid into the meatgrinder.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:26, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Probably...and at this point, I just can't find anything about what battles he served during, where in Europe he served, etc. I can't find anything prior to his high school days and that was a fluke catch in and of itself. So I think, for the moment anyway, the early stuff will have to wait until the biography comes out. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 10:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Finally got an answer at WP:MILITARY on that question I asked. Apparently it is "the Carpathia", with the "the" added. So, I think we should leave that as-is. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 10:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, give this edit a look-see. I know Materialscientist put that down in good faith, but I know we can't use it cause it is a blog, so I am unsure what to do. I mentioned it to him, but he appears to have gone offline (it being 6:45am EDT and all). - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 10:45, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

If you think that's proper, change it back and leave an explanatory note on the user talk page. I expect we'll start seeing more detailed articles, though my guess is they will keep some stuff back. Have you checked his high school's website and looked for any local newspapers in Nevada, Missouri?--Wehwalt (talk) 10:48, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I see what MS was trying to do. It appeared we copied the blog he listed, but it was the blog that copied us. So I removed it as unnecessary. As for the school site, I will check that momentarily. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 11:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, circular references are a problem, increasing as Wiki comes to be more accepted (in the UK, it is called "Wiki" apparently, I was at a football match yesterday and they were introducing some former player from the glory days and they said something like "now Wiki's sometime's wrong, but it says you never saw a football until you moved to England" or words to that effect. Wiki was quite correct, according to the guy.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Really, they just call it "Wiki"? Neat! I checked and the school's website does mention him, which you can see here. Not sure if we should use it since it appears to be the same information from the local paper, which I used on the article. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 11:07, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps a see also? School newspapers, I believe are more recent artifacts than the 1910s, so I would not expect reprints. Yes, the British sometimes come up with a pleasing phrase in the language.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Can't do a see also, cause the school doesn't have a page of its own, but I can just source it as a secondary source. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 11:18, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Added as a secondary source. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 11:25, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

That'll work. Just having it in the article. Shows you've done your homework.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:26, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Excellent. Crap, I just realized I didn't work on the lede on the PR. Damn, OK, back to work. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 11:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

After having a brain fart, likely lack-of-sleep related, I worked on the lede. Finished up one other thing and have cleared out all points on the PR. Have a look-see at your leisure. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 12:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Kumioko found some good information from the Library of Congress. Sometimes, though, with their information, it is copyrighted and we can't use it. Is the information listed something we can use, just source the LOC or should we look elsewhere? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 14:23, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, you can certainly cite to the interviews and so forth. I'm not sure what you mean by "use", though. What were you planning to do with it?--Wehwalt (talk) 14:31, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Put the information (not cut/paste) into the page since it appears we have his discharge date off (I had 1920, the official paper is 1919) and add some information we didn't already have. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 14:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Why wouldn't we be able to use it?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:01, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

When I was working on that image (which was from the LOC), it was copyrighted, so I didn't know if the information was as well, since it was donated from the Buckles family. I just wanted to make sure. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

It's fine. I'll try to look at it later, but I have another review promised for today as well as writing work.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Cool :) Take your time on the re-review, it is no rush. I will check the LOC information and see what I can use and tinker with the page. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:24, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey Wehwalt, I made those changes from the LOC, so feel free to re-review at your leisure. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 18:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a look at it. I have to work on other things right now though.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:07, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Okie DOkie, no worries. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 18:51, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I've made a start on it. Suggest more polish is in order.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Updated the points you made with sources (one from the LOC), Anythingyouwant has added some more. I am waiting on an email from the biographer on a piece of information, so I am at a stand-still at the moment. But feel free to tinker at will and put in hidden comments near sections in need of updates and I will take care of those in the meantime. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 04:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Being that Buckles was just laid to rest, I don't think that email is going to come immediately, so I am going to push ahead and if I get the email during the FAC process, I have an LOC (lots of abbreviations, eh?) source to source it with, so it will be OK. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll work on it when I get a chance. Don't think I've forgotten. My commitments here are heavy right now, and I need to do some serious writing when I get home, there are no bullets left in the magazine for FAC, usually I have a few articles perking along. And the band's on in 66 minutes.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I am just keeping you updated on what I am doing on my end. You go at your own pace (since you have all the irons in the rock fire right now) and when you get to it, you get to it. I am just keeping you in the loop, nothing more. Who is playing tonight? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Silverstein (band). Most of the images in the article are mine.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I was looking at the images on that page and this one seems to be showing something other than what is there. On the page it shows a blue-tinged image, but when you click on it, you see the image on the image page. Something is goofy there. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:41, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Not sure. Lighting makes photography miserable, since I am not a pro and have a relatively inexpensive SLR camera (this was before I got that camera). I should replace a lot of those images, anyway, he's cut his hair and I think colored it a bit. I have a lot of images on my card, but I need to go through them. Drummers are very hard to shoot because of the quick motions and the lighting.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

It isn't in the picture, it is I clicked a picture on the Silverstein (band) page (second one down) and a different picture appeared than the one I clicked. It seems to be a goof or bug in the page or the image (more-than-likely not your fault), just a Wiki-Gremlin. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Sigh. Maybe I'll try for another image of Paul tonight. With the lighting, the "fog", and the quick motions, drummers are a pain in the neck to shoot. I have the best luck at outdoor shows, like this.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:03, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The image you have is fine. It is a glitch in Wikipedia that is showing an old thumbnail, the blue-ish tinged one, (even after bypassing the cache) and when that thumbnail is clicked, it shows a completely different, crisp, clean image you took, not blue-ish tinged. Two seperate images, but under the same filename. It is a glitch that is beyond your control and has nothing to do with the image. I am saying, it is something that, after the show, needs to be address with the WikiTechGeeks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, will figure out who to contact about it and deal with it. I was shooting Paul all night, but I don't think I got much. There is no direct lighting on him, which makes it very hard, you have to get really lucky or have much better equipment and skills than me.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, the current image (the one that comes up after clicking the old thumbnail) is excellent. Especially since he is moving the sticks around, so, a good snap. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 22:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I will replace the poorer images, I hope, once I run through whatever I've got on my SD card from this tour.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:48, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Since you know FA articles, could you take a look at this please? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 06:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to give you an update on the page. After a look talk at WP:RSN, my talkpage and User:A Quest For Knowledge's talk page, I think the page is at a completion. We have as much information as we are ever going to get on his early life, unless one of us goes to Harrison County, Missouri and raids their archives (which isn't likely). Everything after 16 is extensively reported from hundreds of sources, so that is taken care of, plus with the biography coming out at the end of this year or beginning of next, we should have more information. Until then, and again this is just an update, I think we are at a completion. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 05:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I'll give it another look today sometime. I suspect there will be more as the biographer will have to strike while the iron is hot if people are to be interested, but obviously not quite yet! And I know you want to strike while iron is hot too.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I heard the biography will come out the same time as the documentary, kind of a package deal. The documentary is scheduled for "late 2011", but I have heard "early next year" as well, so it is one or the other. :) Yeah, I want to get it through FAC as quickly as possible and try to get it on TFA before people forget about it. I am kind of doing this as Wikipedia's salute to Frank Buckles, if in a way. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 05:55, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Memorial Day would be a good time, I suppose.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:59, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it will probably take it that long to get through FAC. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:44, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Need some advice

A problem has cropped up, and I need some advice on how to go with it. A while ago, WP:Record charts (which incorporates WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS) got moved to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (record charts). That's causing some trouble, with some editors claiming that since it is now an MOS page, it can't possibly be viewed as a guideline related to article content (and, in an even more bizarre thought process, that it only can apply to the tables of charts, not other text relating to charts). Take a look at this example: like I say in the discussion, I can see the argument that it's a sufficiently special case to override the guideline, but I still find the argument that the guideline doesn't apply at all to be surreal.

In a sense, they have a point: MOS pages don't usually contain anything related to source reliability, notability, or anything like that: they are strictly where to put hyphens, dashes, and the like. WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS don't belong in that kind of guideline: they've got nothing to do with formatting, and everything to do with source reliability and notability.

I can easily split the thing up, probably by making WP:GOODCHARTS, WP:BADCHARTS, and WP:USCHARTS independent guidelines, and focusing Wikipedia:Manual of Style (record charts) strictly on the table formats. I'm worried that I would be viewed as a biased editor, and wind up with a backlash that made all three lose credibility. Do you think I'm being paranoid? Do WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS have enough buy-in by enough editors that I can put them someplace else and maintain them as guidelines? Or am I just better off hoping that this kind of fight never shows up again?—Kww(talk) 19:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Unless it is urgent, let me study it and get back to you within 48 to 72 hours. I've never dealt much in this area and need to look at it carefully.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

No rush. Just soliciting opinions before I take action.—Kww(talk) 21:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I really can't think of anything specific to say. I will note that you are a well respected editor and admin, and urge you to trust your judgment. I think you will take heat no matter what you do; you may as well do what you think is right.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Favor

Getting the main Jets article to FA is going to be a tall task, but if your colleague wants to try I'll see what help I can provide. Is it okay if I come over tomorrow to review? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Just drop in anytime.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

A favour

Hey Wehwalt, how are you? Any chance you could take a look at Mike Jackson for me and tell me how he'd be likely to do at FAC? I've had a PR and it's undergoing an A-class review atm, courtesy of WP:MILHIST, which seems to be going well. It would be great to take him to FAC in a few weeks' time when the ACR concludes, so there's no rush, but I'd appreciate a once-over from someone with more experience with FAC. I believe it would be an FA first—first (British, at least) Chief of the General Staff (head of the army) to get to FA—and you're the expert on firsts. ;) Thanks a lot, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:55, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I gave it a look-see as well and there is ALOT in the lede, almost too much, but it seems the article, while sourced very well, is light, especially "Early life". One thing I would work on is to pull information from other sources than the London Gazette. Overusing one soure could pose a problem in an FAC. I would source a little more in "Personal life", like the second wife giving birth in 1990 and the daughter having four children. A couple sentences in "Retirement" need sources too, but then again I source too much. :) Otherwise, a good article, I would say FAC quality. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 07:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I will look at it in a few day's time.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Not to pester, my friend, but the A-class review was closed successfully earlier than I was expecting. I'm going to give it a few days and then take it to FAC, but I'd appreciate it if you could give it the once over—I don't want any nasty surprises. Thanks a lot, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:03, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

On second thoughts, I've decided to bite the bullet and take it to FAC, but your input would still be greatly appreciated when you have time. Cheers, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:10, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Infobox

Hi Wehwalt. I just wanted to let you know that I have added several new parameters to the coin infobox. You can now add weight in grains, mintmarks and you can decide what size you want the image to be. The last thing is one of my favorite contributions to Wikipedia, because it was so difficult to figure out how to make the images resizable without disturbing the infoboxes that are already in use.-RHM22 (talk) 15:55, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I saw your discussion on that. Well done!--Wehwalt (talk) 15:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

If you have any ideas for new parameters, I can add them or modify the existing types.-RHM22 (talk) 16:52, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if it is practical, but some way of having multiple obverses/reverses would be nice, to easily illustrate and set forth the reverses of the Lincoln cent, say. And accomodate the metal changes in the Kennedy. However, that may be difficult to accomplish.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:00, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I can do that. Give me a couple of minutes and I'll figure it out.-RHM22 (talk) 17:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, you can now add up to two each of the obverse and reverse images and an image size, design, designer and design date for both, though none of those fields are necessary. I'll show you an example in my infobox.-RHM22 (talk) 18:25, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, here's the example. Right now, you can only add two images of each, but I can change it later to allow for more.-RHM22 (talk) 18:33, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

It looks good, I'll delve in more detail tomorrow. Sleep.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Let me know if that isn't what you intended for the extra image.-RHM22 (talk) 19:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I think that's good. Sorry, I've been concentrating on finishing Nixon in China (opera). Can a "design discontinued after" field be inserted as well?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:23, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem! Just test out the new features whenever you have occasion. I'll add the "discontinued" fields right now.-RHM22 (talk) 19:04, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it might take a little while for me to figure something out about adding the new field.-RHM22 (talk) 19:05, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

(od) I know nothing about these things, I'm afraid. What is good to have a way of telling the readers the years the design was used.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:34, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Yup, that is a good idea. Even though the coin as a whole may have been minted for ten years, the obverse or reverse design may have only been used for five.-RHM22 (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I updated the template to allow for a discontinued date. Working with even simple templates like the coin one is very confusing, but it's fun to increase their usefulness.-RHM22 (talk) 22:59, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

When I get a chance, I will experimentally play with it. Good work.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:01, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Let me know if want more fields added, such as more photos and stuff like that.-RHM22 (talk) 12:33, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest adding the new version to all our FAs, but where am I going to get a Type I Buffalo Nickel? In space. At this time of night?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Sky Mall?-RHM22 (talk) 12:49, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I guess! But it should work fine for the seven Lincoln cent reverses, although come to think of it that is going to be one big infobox.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:53, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I was thinking about that. One possible solution would be to combine some of the reverses in one image and make them considerably smaller. I have a type I Buffalo nickel that I could scan, by the way. It's not uncirculated, but isn't dateless so it should be ok.-RHM22 (talk) 12:56, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

That's good. The concern is, are people going to complain if we don't have every reverse?--Wehwalt (talk) 13:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Probably. Some are easy, like the Buffalo nickel or Standing Liberty quarter, but something like the Lincoln cent or Jefferson nickel would be hard since there are a lot of different obverses and reverses.-RHM22 (talk) 13:33, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

(od)Type 1 Standing Liberty in decent condition isn't cheap.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:37, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

That's true. actually, any decent Standing Liberty costs pretty much. I suppose there weren't many saved. I have a type I Standing Liberty, but it's maybe VG/F condition.-RHM22 (talk) 20:56, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the support on Flowing Hair by the way! There doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in it, so any feedback is really great.-RHM22 (talk) 20:58, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. It is a hard time right now finding reviewers. As you can see, Macdonald is in the doldrums too. Still, most of the time, these things resolve themselves. As for standing liberty, it is possible to buy copies legal under the relevant laws, with copy stamped on one side (obviously you need two coins) on ebay but I haven't decided whether to go that road. I've not collected US coins much since I was a child.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:24, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I haven't collected in a while either, but I did attempt a U.S. type set some time ago, so I have most of the more common coin types of the 19th and 20th centuries.-RHM22 (talk) 12:13, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Young blonde, mysterious death, angry bloggers

It's deja vu all over again. Please help me keep an eye on Brittany Murphy, per the excitement at http://justiceforbrittany.tumblr.com/post/4341045224/brittanymurphy-wikipedia-user-kww-has-undone-my —Kww(talk) 01:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, it's generating plenty of traffic. Why deja vu? And nobody's claiming there was anything mysterious about her death, quite the opposite. (W090584 (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC))

Because Kww and I were involved in getting Natalee Holloway to FA, which involved a young blonde, who died (or at least disappeared) mysteriously, and there certainly were bloggers who were angry. About us, among other things.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:30, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks (W090584 (talk) 18:46, 5 April 2011 (UTC))

I don't think we should worry about it. At least until they are angry as hell and not going to take it anymore, then we can do something. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:19, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

An admin's job is never done. Having had people trying to recruit editors to work against us on the Holloway article, we're naturally going to take a dim view of it, and if Kww comes to me with one I will of course put it on my watchlist and keep an eye on it.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

FAC - Thomas Beecham

Your concluding batch of suggestions formed an appropriate finale to the peer review, and I have nominated the article at FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Thomas Beecham/archive1). Needless to say, any comments you cared to make there would be gladly received. Tim riley (talk) 10:26, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:MILHIST Post

Hey, since User:Anythingyouwant has worked on the areas that needed work (the ones you suggested by compressed) on the Frank Buckles article and I have seen nothing on the WP:MILITARY post I made, I am wondering if we even need it anymore. I asked AYW and he said it was up to you. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:27, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I fully understand what you're talking about. Do you mean drop the A class review? That's your decision.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:44, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

No, not at all. But I did get confused, too many reviews and talk pages going on. :) It was AYW who thought the last section should be compressed, see here. He tinkered with it after I posted to WP:MILITARY requesting a historian to help with that. I am asking, so I remove the WP:MILITARY post requesting a historian (not the A-Class review). Currently, HJ is doing the A-Class review and it is going along just fine. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Glad to hear it.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:54, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on April 16, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 16, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 06:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Me and Juliet is a musical comedy by Richard Rodgers (music) and Oscar Hammerstein II (lyrics and book), their sixth stage collaboration. The work tells a story of romance backstage at a long-running musical: assistant stage manager Larry woos chorus girl Jeanie behind the back of her electrician boyfriend, Bob. Me and Juliet premiered in 1953 and was not a success, closing after a year on Broadway. The show received no Tony Award nominations. When Me and Juliet began tryout performances in Cleveland, the duo realized that the show had problems with the plot and staging. Extensive revisions during the remaining Cleveland and Boston tryouts failed to cure the difficulties with the plot, which the critics considered weak and uninteresting. The show was met with less-than-favorable reviews, though Jo Mielziner's staging won praise from audience and critics. The show closed once it had exhausted its advance sales. With the exception of a short run in Chicago, there was no national tour, and the show is almost never seen—a small-scale production was presented by London's Finborough Theatre in 2010. (more...)

Congrats again, Sir. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:34, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, thanks. In my view, Raul's taken the weakest of my R&H articles, but that leaves the best for later.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:14, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article/requests#Point_query

Did you forget about Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article/requests#Point_query?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Your Pestering Mentee Here

I understand you are busy but if you do have a spare moment, I have New York Jets up for peer review and I would appreciate any feedback before I go to FAC. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 22:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I saw the request. I'll look at it. I was shaking my head at how many of the people I've worked with get a taste of FAC and can't wait to get back. I will try to get to it this weekend.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't exactly say I CAN'T WAIT, it's more of a lets get this over with thing. I've been working on this article and ours since July and it is time to move on to other projects. I will admit though there is some eagerness. You must have that effect on people :) -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 02:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

FAC is sort of like an intellectual battle, in which the best strategy in my view is to fight as little as possible. Thus, you do as much as you possibly can before the FAC in the hopes that reviewers will see the points you really care about as fait accomplit. Incidentally, I always find time for people I've been co-writers with. Reviewing is a different state of mind for me than writing, and then I find it hard to get back in writing mode. Yet reviews are essential, not only because any FAC writer is expected to review, but also because I feel it is important for me to encourage writers I've worked with like yourself and my other "talk page stalkers". I'm one person, I can only do so much. Important as some of my articles may be (most are trivial but one or two I think are the best work on the subject available), (good luck finding a better Jets history than the one we wrote; Eshkenazi's book only goes up to 1997) building the next group of FA writers is critical, you guys are further from burnout than me. People who can build on my mistakes and learn from them!--Wehwalt (talk) 20:04, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I read over your review, which I appreciate as it seems my topic isn't too terribly high on the totem pole right now. I've corrected most of the article per your suggestions, I just have a few things I wanted to run by you:

• In spite of the fact Namath was drafted in December of '64, it is technically the '65 draft. Maybe I could replace "'65 draftee" with "quarterback" instead, thoughts?
• I checked the commons and there is little for images. I'm still kicking myself for the December fiasco, you would have thought I could have gotten a clear shot of Rex after the hell I went through.
• I'll finish working on the OAK rivalry; I actually saw an article recently written by Randy Lange that explains the scheduling formula and how the Jets have ended up in the Black Hole the last 10 out of 12 times.
• You may be right, it could be time to add something about the Jets and Colts; the Super Bowl victory is automatically up there as well as the back-to-back visits in the playoffs the past two seasons -- I'll mull it over.
• The paragraph of the first rounders should be easy enough (Namath, Lyons, Toon, Revis and Mangold are definitely some positive faces; as for the negatives, where do I begin? Thomas, Gholston, the passing of Marino for O'Brien, K. Brady, Robertson, need I continue?).
• Do you think a section about the team's stadium history would be appropriate? I just ask because there is no mention of the Jets bid for the West Side Stadium anywhere.

I plan on working on the article throughout the week as time permits and hopefully, I'll have it finished by the weekend unless anymore reviewers stop by. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 23:20, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I have no objection to the stadium history. Is there a standardized format for NFL team articles that must be followed? As for your topic not being high on the totem pole, I haven't ruled out doing another Jets article, I just haven't figured out one to do, I'd like it to be one where I can use my references again. Maybe the Jets' 68 season, that would be fun. And like I said, I always make time for people I've worked with. BTW, you never said what happened to you in December and I didn't like to ask because I knew you were going and asking if you enjoyed the play, Mrs. Lincoln just didnt' seem to be a good idea. As for Namath, I guess whatever you decide is fine. The purpose of a peer review in my view is not to usurp the principal writers, but to make sure they've thought about the things you bring up.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know, there really isn't a standardized format for team articles, I was hoping to try and set one. I suppose, if I had to pick, the Jets's is similar to the Patriots's article though. And when I was referring to the low totem pole thing I meant the lack of other editors at PR not you, you always make time and do excellent work! The Foxboro Fiasco of December shall never be mentioned again! As for the other things, like I said, I'll work on those and hopefully have it ready if not this weekend, next. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 10:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest blazing your own path, and given the shortness of the text, include more rather than less. Perhaps have also have a section on ownership, as well as stadiums. Neither should be complicated. Include most of what you've mentioned above, if you like. I think it should be fine. I'll give it another look in a couple of days.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

When you have a minute, can you take a look at my sandbox for copy editing as I've finished the paragraph on the stadiums. Thanks. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 21:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I have finished writing everything and I just need you to do some sandbox editing when you have time. And, fair warning: the first rounders/Jets-Colts were done more out of the fact that I couldn't stare at the screen any longer so it needs some major reworking/revision (which, I will help with) but the foundation has been laid. As soon as your finished, I'll add the information and hopefully be off to FAC! -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 19:20, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

ASAP.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:45, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

A couple of things. These sections seem written very informally and I would suggest that it is likely that you'll encounter problems at FAC if you don't make it read more formally. And I have no idea where you are getting the different dashes from. The greatest danger in an article like this is sounding fannish.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:43, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't review the rest of it until you put in citations. I generally won't review uncited text because I want to see the citations. The informality made me wince on the subjected to knee surgery line. Now, I won't say I never put a joke in an article, or a horrifying pun. But I know when to get away with stuff like that, and well, people are more likely to cut me a break on that sort of thing. A little more blandness, I think.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:48, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Like I said, I got tired looking at the screen and it is very raw, to say the least. However, I will do some editing over the course of tonight and tomorrow and I will also add the citations. Hopefully it will be more functional tomorrow. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 22:49, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Try it now. -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 16:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Much better than last night.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

The 1983 draft took place on April 26 and 27. By the way, how could you possibly resist this?-- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 17:21, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I was at that game; I am actually 3-0 with the Jets in Foxboro (the only important game was 2002, though, the other two were back in the day). It was an awful day; I think the Daily News headline was "Jets find a Patsy". Anyhoo, the article you want is [9] here, though it is subscription required, but the text says:

SCOUTING SCOUTING; Sidelines at Draft By Thomas Rogers Published: April 27, 1983 E-MAIL SEND TO PHONE PRINT

The fans who watch the National Football League draft unfold each year are likely to get a little boisterous, as they did yesterday at the New York Sheraton Hotel when some of them hooted the Jets' first-round selection of Ken O'Brien, the quarterback from California-Davis.

When he heard the reaction, Pete Rozelle, the N.F.L. commissioner, was reminded of a fan's remark in 1976, a few months after the Pittsburgh Steelers, who played strong overall defense, had defeated the Minnesota Vikings, 16-6, in Super Bowl IX. On the final round, I think it was, the Vikings passed, Rozelle said. So when it was announced, 'Minnesota passes,' a fan yelled, 'And L.C. Greenwood knocks it down.'

Ha! I added "much to the fans dismay" at the end of sentence ("Instead drafted O'Brien...") but I really like that Rozelle quote, it is rather effective. Luckily, NYT hasn't started the subscription "lockout". That begins tomorrow; and the archives, 1981-present, are free to view, at least for the next few hours. Anyway, I'll go nitpicking but I'm essentially finished with the material and about ready to make it live, any other thoughts you have? -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 17:46, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, read it through a few times and see how it goes before posting it. I'll give it another pass through in a couple of days.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm slowly trying to work my way back into the swing of things after my brief break. Could you possibly take a look at the lead re-write in my sandbox for the Jets article? Hopefully it has enough "meat" on it. I also need to significantly cut down the 1st rounder paragraphs, any suggestions on that front? And, I tried to add a brief paragraph to replace the gallery on the main page but I'm stumped as to what else I could write, any suggestions? -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 20:05, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I didn't see anything wrong with any of those things, except I'm not certain what you are talking about with replacing the gallery. What did you replace it with?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

It was a brief paragraph, I think there should be more but as I said, I'm not sure of what else to say. Here is the passage I wrote: "The Jets have undergone three significant uniform changes with minor alterations throughout the years. The well-know green and white uniforms came about in 1963 when the team was renamed. The franchise introduced the Titans of New York throwback uniforms in 2007 to commemorate their heritage." -- The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 00:34, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

"well-known". Well, just say what they wore before and after, so to speak. If you can find that Wismer/Notre Dame story, good place to trot it out.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:18, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I believe I have taken care of most of the issues with the article expressed at PR. The only thing that remains is potentially adding a blurb about the frequent meetings in Oakland's house (though I have been told the rivalry section is too extensive) and expanding the history section. Do you have any suggestions as to what years I should expand on (The 70s, 80s are reduced to a mini paragraph so I figure I'll start there, anywhere else)?.

I'd leave it out. You may get complaints as it is that the article is fannish, but I don't know how you'd avoid that.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:07, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

National Current Coinage template

Please comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Numismatics#National_coinage_history_template.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I have nothing to say about the matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:20, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Love, Loss, and What I Wore

You are a Theatre expert and thought you might want to take a look at Love, Loss, and What I Wore. How am I suppose to handle the international and national tours in the infobox? Advice/help appreciated.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:12, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

It may be a couple of days before I have a reasoned answer for you do to other commitments (and also may not finish Franklin til then) but I'll see what I can do.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:30, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

I express no opinion on the matter. Please see my comments under the Franklin GA and be guided accordingly. After Lane and King, I'm becoming increasingly unhappy.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:14, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

GA review

I did not understand "I think we both know the answer lies elsewhere. Please be guided accordingly in future," But I think the first sentence means GA reviews don't matter if the article is going to FA and the second means just pass any old shit.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

No it does not. Can I ask if you think that any review that you have ever done of one of my articles has been satisfactory to both of us? Just wondering.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:46, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Butting in, I don't think it'll take me very long to go through the article after all the work that was done during the first review. I'll post up my observations section by section over the next hour or so, and I'll post here again when I'm done. Malleus Fatuorum 22:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Very well. I addressed the first comment, and I'm going to bed. I will see what you come up with.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm done; see what you think. Malleus Fatuorum 00:07, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It is fine. Thank you for diving in under these circumstances.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

PR Question

Hey Wehwalt, I see you are back into the swing of things. I know you have an insane pile of work to get to, but I was wondering where the PR was in that pile? Just curious and not something that has to be done now, just hadn't heard from ya in a couple. Hope all is well in your neck of the woods. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:11, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! :) So, how's it feel not to be wakin' up on the road in a different city everyday? Gotten used to it yet or still adjusting? :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:31, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Not sure. I'm sleeping at funny hours, but hopefully it's back under control.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:34, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Your mind is still in a different time zone. :) It will kick over eventually. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

• Hey, on citing, {{cite web}} says the date should go date/month/year, could it go month/date/year, since this is an American article or does it have to be the other way around? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I would try to match the way it is done in the article and the way it appears in the references, if possible.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

In the references, it is YMD, and in the article it is MDY, so I was going to go MDY throughout, just wanted to make sure it was cool. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know, that should be fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:11, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant worked on the PR while I was working on the A-Class (yeah, two reviews at once, nuts, I know), so if you have any further points we need to address, please let us know. I am still online, so I can take care of them from here, or at least until AYW comes back and we can double team the hell outta it. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• I noticed the change you made to the page. I added that term, Interwar period, to the body of that section, I think it is a good term. Is there anything else that needs to be worked on? I seem to have some insomnia right now, so I can knock some stuff out this early morning. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 11:06, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

The section names had been troubling me for some time. I do not see anything obvious, but I will give it a look later on. Unhappily, I have a commitment this morning I have to get ready and dressed and all that.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Just think of "the road" and you'll get through it. :) Feel free to change the section names as you feel necessary. The page is still a "work in progress". :) I should be up a little longer, if not, I will take care of whatever you post later on today (unless AYW gets to it first). :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Really, at this point, it's just decoration. I'm more concerned about what happens to this article when the family-sponsored stuff begins hitting it. For one thing, there may be doubts as to accuracy, as often happens in family-written stuff rather than scholarly. And how will it affect the article structure?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:41, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Crashed for a few, but got woke up. Stupid insomnia...stupid neighbors. Anywho, Joefromrandb made a good point about the quote in the box in the bottom section. I have wanted to remove it, because I feel the space could be best used by a picture and since it wasn't said by Frank, it might not be notable. So, I am wondering, do you think I should remove the quote box? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I have never been a fan of quote boxes, but possibly, it is one of the things that had I bothered to do, I'd feel differently about. However, that being said, I don't think anything Frank said really needs to stand out. He is not famous for his wisdom, though no doubt he learned a lot in 110 years. I think an image, that you can't get in there any other way, is more valuable than a quote box, which you can always put in the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:05, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Carcaroth found a really good quote, shorter and from The Washington Post (a reporter) and it kinda puts his generation and his funeral together in a nice little bow. Give it a look-see and if you still think it isn't needed, I will snag that picture from the talk page and put it in it's place. Another idea, is if you think the picture is needed and the quote is something to keep, I could put the quote at the very bottom in a long form quote box and the picture to the side. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

No, the point of a peer review isn't to micromanage those who are doing the work. Decide on which way you think best benefits the article and do it.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:33, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Okie Dokie. :) I will track down AYW and Joe and see what they think of putting the quote on the bottom in long form and the picture from talk (that was the one you were talking about right?) in the article. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Joe liked the idea, but AYW didn't. So I became tie-breaker and went with it. There are three pictures in this section, in order like a "story" and then the quote at the bottom as kind of the "final word" on everything. I don't know if it will remain, as AYW was not for the idea, so there will be tinkering. But I would like to know your opinion on it anyway. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:17, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Franklin half dollar

Nice work on Franklin! In my opinion, the most deserving man (other than perhaps George Washington) to appear on a coin. Kennedy served honorably in the war, but he's hardly a Benjamin Franklin. Anyway, I thought you might be interested in a rather humorous story I read in Bowers. Benjamin Rush, who was Treasurer of the Mint, filed formal charges against Director Elias Boudinot for stealing Mint property. The property he stole was horse dung that Boudinot had hauled from the Mint. It sounds funny, but horse dung did and still does have great value to those who know how to use it. For fertilizer, there is no better. I'm not sure what use the Mint had for it, though, other than maybe some type of tinder.-RHM22 (talk) 23:18, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Saltpeter, perhaps. Very amusing indeed. I'm hanging on for the Nixon coin in 2016!--Wehwalt (talk) 10:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Good thinking on the saltpeter! I find it funny everytime I'm reminded about the upcoming Nixon dollar. Add that to the Harding dollar and you have a really nice set. Too bad there probably won't be a Clinton dollar in that series, to form the trinity. Nice work on another main page appearance by the way!-RHM22 (talk) 13:11, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Actually, Nixon served honorably in the war too. Thanks on the main page. I don't have much more to say about Ben, so I'm going to move on to try to complete the featured topic with Jefferson nickel, presently a redirect to part of the nickel article.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

When you get a chance, could you please look over Draped Bust dollar and add a few different refs to increase the diversity? I like the article more than I thought I would.-RHM22 (talk) 21:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Breen and Taxay and the like? Not a problem. I'll try to do it tonight, if not tomorrow.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Yup, Breen and Taxay would be great. Thanks!-RHM22 (talk) 21:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you think I could make administrator? I might try one day. It would be handy to be able to move stuff and do other things.-RHM22 (talk) 22:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, you've kept your nose clean and avoided offending people. I suspect that there will be some "he doesn't need it".--Wehwalt (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Probably, and they might be right about that. I wouldn't use it as much as others. I think I'll just suggest a page mover tool for trusted users instead, since that's what I could use the most.-RHM22 (talk) 22:24, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I had only three FAs when I became an admin, and I felt much the same way about taking the job. Why not think about it a bit more? We aren't running out of mops, you know!--Wehwalt (talk) 22:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

What Taxay says about the Draped bust dollar is that it traded as par with the Spanish milled, even though it wasn't as heavy. It was exported, traded for Spanish milled in the West Indies, those were imported as bullion and traded in at the Mint for silver dollars, so on so forth.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:35, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I read about that, but I wasn't sure whether or not to add it. What do you think?

As for the adminship question, to be honest, I'd rather have a dustpan! Still, I will consider it. Being a rollbacker, reviewer and file mover is enough to be informed of the Great and Glorious People's Cabal of Wikipedia (GGPCW), but not enough to know the inner workings of it. By the way, the symbol of the GGPCW should be a drawing of two obese cetaceans (Jumbo Whales). You can pass that on to the Grand Poobah if you'd like.-RHM22 (talk) 22:39, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

We don't cross paths much, the Grand Poobah and I, but I assure you that if we ever bend elbows together, the matter will have my uppermost invention. I don't really "do" cliques, personally, though I have heard as much as the next guy.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:43, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Good idea, we can't let the newbies know about the Cabal. Not there is one, that is.-RHM22 (talk) 01:19, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Of course. By the way, I'll need your help in doing an effective infobox for Jefferson nickel, I will probably move it out of userspace today. Unhappily, I don't think failed designs are in the public domain; I'd prefer to have an image of Schlag's original design.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't think they are, since Schlag wasn't a federal employee. What would you like on the infobox?-RHM22 (talk) 13:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I haven't found a source to say this yet, but Schlag is almost certainly the only person to have fought against the US to design a US coin. I would have the current designs as now, then under that the original obverse, then under that the five Westward Journey designs, perhaps the obverse first then the four reverses, and have them considerably smaller so as not to have a huge size infobox.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'll work something up and try it out in one of my sandboxes.-RHM22 (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I've taken the article live now. Jefferson nickel.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

It looks good! You can see my trial run infobox here. How does it look to you?-RHM22 (talk) 17:54, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I've made a couple of minor changes and inserted it in the article. I suspect we'll tweak it.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:58, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look. I had to combine all the images manually, since allowing for them individually would have been very difficult and maybe impossible.-RHM22 (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I figured you would. I'm surprised it came out so well!--Wehwalt (talk) 20:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I am too actually. You can also resize the images if you'd like. The original pictures are very large.-RHM22 (talk) 20:11, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I think it's good. A good week's work for the numismatic field all around.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:25, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed! Three different articles on three different denominations.-RHM22 (talk) 20:35, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Franklin's going to be the problem to sell, it is so damn short.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:46, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Dollar coins are difficult for that too. Draped Bust would have been very short if not for the stuff about the 1804 dollar. Speaking of dollars, do you know where I can find the original sketches or paintings from Thomas Sully or Titian Peale of the Seated Liberty?-RHM22 (talk) 20:58, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

According to Taxay, they're in the American philosophical Society Library, though one may be in the Library Company of Philadelphia.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Well that might be a bit of a jaunt! There are some in Bowers that I scan if I have to (the paintings are PD), but I prefer to get them from other sources.-RHM22 (talk) 21:09, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

You can always check their website or email them.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:11, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I've got those mint medals scanned, and I found an image of Frank Leach, who was involved in the Saint Gaudens fuss. Noting that there's an article in the Numismatist next month on the Washington quarter, maybe I should do Roosevelt dime next. Short article. Nothing has happened to it since 1946 but a change of metal and mintmark.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I like those medals! Roosevelt dime is another kind of tricky one, since nobody is interesting in writing about it. Did you know that they put Joseph Stalin's initials (JS) on the coin? A few years later, they replaced them with the Sinnock's initials (JS) after a public outcry.-RHM22 (talk) 16:00, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the Kremlin had gremlins within the Mint ... and then they put the hammer and sickle on the Kennedy half! Blast those commies!--Wehwalt (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Before they were reds, they were fascists. The Mercury dime used the fasces, which was also used by fascist Italy. Then, the Washington quarter used the eagle, a symbol also used by Nazi Germany!!!!!!!!!!!-RHM22 (talk) 16:16, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

And then the Wiemar Republic fiasco with the cent a couple of years ago ... --Wehwalt (talk) 16:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad they didn't pick the wheat bundle or the hideous, hideous, hideous American flag. Obviously I like the flag (check my userpage), but it looks really ugly on a coin, especially one so small as a cent.-RHM22 (talk) 15:57, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, no flag reproduces well on a coin in my view. I caught your comment at peer review and responded. If I had a feeling they were PR, I'd have no objection to going over to the National Archives and having a look, but don't think they were. The Mint was in cover up mode.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:00, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I doubt they were reproduced at all until people like Breen began researching them and compiling information.-RHM22 (talk) 16:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I did look through The Numismatist for 1922. There was plenty of coverage of the Peace dollar, but they didn't know the story about the broken sword on the actual coin, they just assumed the reverses were switched.

Yeah, I read through that one also.-RHM22 (talk) 16:15, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

(od)I don't mind going to the archives, it's just kinda pointless if there aren't going to be usable images.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:17, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I doubt there would be anything useful for Peace dollar there anyway, unless the Director of the Mint included a photo of the original design in his annual report. Could you let me know if you do go though? I'd still love to find that image of the original SBA design from the Mint director's report.-RHM22 (talk) 18:06, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I will. I wonder if the Mint released Gasparro's own work or did they let reporters photograph an electrotype or something. Hmmmmm.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:17, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that. I believe that the photograph was taken of a plaster model, since I doubt that any trial strikes were actually created of the Liberty design. Since Gasparro was Chief Engraver, his work should be considered the work of a federal employee. Don't worry about it if you can't find the Director's Report, because I have an online source. The quality is pretty low, but it'll illustrate the design well enough. I also have the image of Anthony that Gasparro based his design on.-RHM22 (talk) 18:23, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I dont' know when or if I'll go. Do you know if the Mint materials are in College Park or in DC? I really need a good reason to go, especially to downtown DC in tourist season. College Park isn't fun to get to either. Maybe when we get going on Eisenhower and Anthony--I've seen images of a 1970 Eisenhower design (there was a long political fracas which delayed the coin), maybe those models or images are available.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:27, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

There are also models for the Roosevelt dime that Sinnock changed considerably, those models are PD, though the images likely not.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea where the Mint materials are kept. I'm sure they would have copies in the National Archives. I've never been to DC, so I don't know where anything is there. The images are the tricky thing about the models. I've seen a beautiful model for the Lincoln cent, but the image is pretty new, so I can't upload it.-RHM22 (talk) 18:31, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

There is the main archives building, the famous one in downtown DC where they keep the Declaration and all that jazz. There are some materials there. A lot of other stuff is at the new building in College Park, Maryland. Either is a pain in the neck hour for me to get to, and my researcher's card has expired, so I'd have to go through orientation and so forth. Plus there are a dozen Presidential libraries across the country that are run by NARA, I've been to the Nixon one several times for research and am meaning to go to the Reagan one next time I am in California. I will look in Burdette's books, he will undoubtedly say which archives in the bibliography. The Presidential libraries don't have any coin materials I'm aware of.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:39, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I wish Laser Brain would promote already. Macdonald is so ripe for promotion it's starting to wrinkle and get raisiny. Then I could nominate Peace dollar. I hope you do not mind my raiding the dollar category.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Of course not! My goal is to have every dollar coin article gain featured status. It really doesn't matter how they get there, as long as everything is done well. I couldn't do any better anyway, since Burdette is the best in his genre and your prose is great. I think it'll be a while, but if Flowing Hair is promoted, I'm going to nominate Draped Bust and then begin work on either Gobrecht or Seated. I can't nominate Trade yet because I don't have a usable picture.-RHM22 (talk) 23:23, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I think after Peace I will nominate Jefferson and finish off that featured topic.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:25, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Did you notice how almost every coin article has the same two refs in it? One is (I think) the Red Book and the other is some book by Dave Harper. I have read both of those books, and the Red Book is relatively useful, and the Harper book has very little in the way of good information other than mintages, which the Red Book already covers. I wonder if someone from Krause went through and put that one in.-RHM22 (talk) 23:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Probably, we are the world's seventh-most viewed website, after all, or whatever it is this week, we don't charge anyone, and the fox is over there watching the edit war in Falafel.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:29, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I must say, some edit wars are funny. By the way, I got a few new books at a (you guessed it) yard sale on Saturday. One is an investors guide to silver dollars, but there's mostly just info about buying and selling and not much history. I also got the same thing but for gold coins, a book of general U.S. paper money, one on obsolete banknotes of Pennsylvania, and three capital plastics holders (one for gold coins and one for 20th century dollars). Though there's not a lot of usable stuff for Wikipedia, I always enjoy finding slightly obscure books, rather than the standard Red and Blue Books that are everywhere.-RHM22 (talk) 23:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

This seems like it might be wrong, but the silver dollar book says that the last 1964 dollar was not melted until 1970.-RHM22 (talk) 23:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, two pieces had been sent to Washington, I think to the Treasury Department. They were the last.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

It's too bad that none were photographed.-RHM22 (talk) 00:10, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Maybe they were. Another case of the Mint being in cover up mode.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:20, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Jefferson nickel was approved at DYK. I'm going for WP:FOUR with that one.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:22, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

That shouldn't be a problem. I'm surprised there wasn't a Jefferson nickel article already! By the way, I looked up that Lincoln cent pattern I mentioned earlier, and it turns out that it was actually from 1952, so it probably wouldn't be usable anyway. Apparently, James Earle Fraser sent an obverse design to the Mint director, but nothing was done to implement the design.-RHM22 (talk) 03:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Is there a penalty for an unsuccessful RfA? If not, I'm going to try it. I'll just let the reviewers know that I have a fairly specific reason for my nominating, but I would also like to help in other areas (such as clearing administrative backlogs) when requested or when I come upon them.-RHM22 (talk) 16:25, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

If it fails, you have to wait two weeks for another nomination, or get permission from Raul or a delegate. Yeah, I think I mention in the cent article they were looking into a new design in the early fifties, but it never really went anywhere. I think Brenner made a living off of plaques and medals that resembled the cent.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:28, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, good. I don't care about the two week thing, because I'm not going to try again if it's not successful. I'm going to nominate myself now if I can figure out how.-RHM22 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry, I thought you said FAC. No, there is no penalty. It is customary to wait six months if not successful, or risk opposes on that ground.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:56, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem! It doesn't matter to me, because this'll be my first and last try at this!-RHM22 (talk) 17:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

It's up now.-RHM22 (talk) 17:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Adam Eckfeldt

Hello! Your submission of Adam Eckfeldt at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:07, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Page Move Request

Could you do a page move for me? Please move WAGE (AM) to WCRW. It is a move to coorespond with a call sign change. Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand. Are you saying that WAGE is becoming WCRW? It says something I read as different on the WCRW (disambiguation) page.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:57, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yup, WAGE has switched it's call sign to WCRW and is now broadcasting on AM 1190 (used to be AM 1200). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see you just did it yourself.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yup, just needed the one page deleted. :) Thanks! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Nixon at FAC

I have closed the Nixon in China (opera) peer review, and nominated the article at FAC. I won't be able to do much about any early comments as I shall be offline on Saturday until the evening. I'll check in then. Brianboulton (talk) 17:54, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll hold the fort.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:59, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Why isn't the retrieval date showing for ref 3? It's in the text. I tried changing it, but it still doesn't show, on my screen anyway. Brianboulton (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I will take a look at it. Be aware you are adding 2010 retrieval dates in international date format, but this article uses month first.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:22, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

It's fixed. Formatting error when I moved into cite format.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:27, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I am all finger and thumbs today. I have corrected the format - and year - of the Tempo ref. Brianboulton (talk) 16:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source for the premiere cast as shown in the roles table? This article names the six principals, but not the minor players. There's a subscription Los Angeles Times article (ref 17) which may have the additional details. Otherwise, I'm still waiting for some significant comment or criticism; where have all the reviewers gone? (My online time is severely restricted this week because of other commitments, so maybe its as well that things are quiet). Brianboulton (talk) 21:56, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

A few moments later - all the required names are mentioned in this review, if nothing better is available. Brianboulton (talk) 22:01, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I saw nothing better on Google.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:16, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I've done the other ones. We could cite to both the article you just linked to, and to the something which lists the roles. My copy of Opera News, for example.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:20, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I've added the two newspaper refs for the premiere cast. Can you add your Opera News ref for the list of roles? That should fix it. Brianboulton (talk) 23:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Reassessments

I only make a couple minor tweaks of assessments on a couple that were pretty obviously wrong. Mostly I was just estimating importance to the Conservatism and Socialism projects of "???" ranked articles, which is pretty much a bang-bang process. I put William Rehnquist into "TOP" status for the Law group, and Gerald Ford into "TOP" status for Presidents, and so on — nothing controversial, I don't think. I only bumped a couple Bs to Cs and Cs to Bs — again, nothing controversial. Let me know if you think I screwed up on anything and thanks for your concern, and I mean that seriously. Carrite (talk) 01:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

It's not a problem. There have been difficulties with rapid-fire reassessments in the past, but if you are thinking about it obviously there is no problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

RfA

Hi Wehwalt. I've not seen you around here yet, and I think your participation would be extremely valuable. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look and see what is up.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a pilot study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 18:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to help but you need to improve the English in that questionaire.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:56, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Got an issue with an anon

Hey Wehwalt, got an anon who is putting a ton of unsourced content into numerous television station pages. Anon is currently the subject of a slow moving ANI thread (yeah, I had to start one). It isn't going anywhere and the anon is on a tear again this afternoon. I am at a loss as to what to do. I want to mass rollback, but I haven't been given the greenlight. CUs have been promised, but nothing has been done. I really don't know what to do, can you help? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I think you have to ride out the thread. If it ends inconclusively, I am not sure I can argue with mass rollback.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, I will let it run itself out, which will probably be sometime tonight, barring any further comments. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Even though some of the information he's adding may be right, some of it seems to be wrong, and I don't see how it is practical to go through and figure out which is which.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

See, the information could very well be all correct, but since it isn't sourced and the only source we could get is a YouTube video (and those are generally frowned upon in most cases), it just can't be sourced. Some of these are packages that may have never aired, may have been for station IDs in the middle of the night or just filler in between commercials, we don't know. Though all are OR, so we can't keep any of it. On top of that, the anon is likely a sock of an indef blocked user. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:24, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Frank Buckles PR

I was wondering what the status was on the PR for the Frank Buckles article. I think we have pretty much ironed out all the wrinkles and worked out all the bugs. Just waiting for all the reviews to close before putting it through to FAC. Please let me know. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I really don't have any more comments to give you as part of the PR, which I agree you should close as soon as possible, I don't think there's anything to be gained by keeping it open. I'll give it another read through once you open the FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:25, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I thought you closed the PR, my last PR was closed by the person who was doing the reviewing on it (that was for the Stephens City article). My goof there. I will close that momentarily. Until the A-Class review is completed, I will wait on FAC. Don't want to have a review and an FAC going at the same time. Thank you for helping so far on this project. :) Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 11:35, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

PR is now closed. I added it to the "Article milestones" box on the talk page. Could you check that for me though, I am not sure if I did that correctly. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 11:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

While there is no prohibition against simultaneous A-class and FAC, I agree it would not win you brownie points. You need to self revert on the article achievements, a bot does that.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:46, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Seen you did that (d'oh!), forgot that the bot does that. My goof. I have a message into User:HJ Mitchell (the A-Class reviewer) as to the status of the review, so the article should be at FAC probably by this weekend, if not next. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 11:50, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Apparently, HJ's computer is "on the blink", so it might be a couple before the A-Class review is finished and the FAC can begin. If HJ doesn't come back in a couple days (cause computer problems can be ongoing sometimes), I will ask another reviewer to check over his (HJ's) information and then go from there. I will keep you updated so you know the course of the FAC. Hope all is well. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:18, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Macdonald

Great job as always. Congrats. Connormah (talk) 06:08, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

From me, too; I'd not been watching this. And now we have Nixon Gloriosus. That was a real surprise - I was expecting that to run on until next week at least. There's a big backlog building on the peer review page, I have RL issues, and my Percy Grainger project is going very slowly, so I will be fairly quiet on the FAC front for a while. After Grainger it will be Kathleen Ferrier and then Messah, (though I may sneak in a non-musical subject before the Handel project). Brianboulton (talk) 08:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

And to you as well. I've got Peace dollar up and it's doing quite well so far and my joint work with Dr Kiernan Abdul Karim (the Munshi) will probably hit this weekend. After that there are coin articles I need to polish and look for another project as well. I will keep an eye on Grainger, I will admit to knowing nothing about him.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:27, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Keep them doggies rollin Brianboulton (talk) 16:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

It saves me buying or borrowing more references. Nixon, the man himself, has been pushed back until June, but we're only 20 months out from the Nixon Centennial and I'm determined to have it FA for that. I'll be back in Calif at the end of June and can dig into the library more if needed.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:33, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Nice work on Nixon in China, the both of you! I think that perhaps when the delegates see a conom from Wehwalt and Brian, they just automatically pass it.-RHM22 (talk) 02:58, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks much. If I had a cent for every page view ...--Wehwalt (talk) 03:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

If I had a cent for every page view on Flowing Hair dollar, I would have enough to buy one at face value. By the way, this is probably an odd question, but is Brianboulton related to Matthew Boulton? That would be great!-RHM22 (talk) 03:07, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

He said he was a descendent at the time I did the Matthew article.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:14, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

That's really interesting! That family name may be the most important in numismatics.-RHM22 (talk) 03:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I tend to agree. That article was a lot of fun. I was able to get great token images from Boulton collectors.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

He's one of those people whom numismatists enjoy reading about, but regular people do too.-RHM22 (talk) 13:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I got some interesting non coin images as well, man did a lot in his lifetime. And other people have added a few.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

It's off topic, but I wonder if you have some more information on this. Do you think pattern coins are lawful money? I think so, since they're created by the Mint and are usually valued.-RHM22 (talk) 13:58, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't think they are lawful money as they were never monetized, except if patterns left the Mint through normal circulation means (1856 flying eagle). However, except for a few 20th century ones, they were created by Mint engravers in the course of their duties, so are PD that way.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured that most would be PD anyway. I can see how they wouldn't be legal tender, because the design change wasn't yet authorized in most cases.-RHM22 (talk) 14:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I do not think the Mint realized how carefully the lens of history would be trained on them. I've been looking for a PD version of the Adam Eckfeldt medal but have had no luck.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:09, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll see if I can find any images of that medal.-RHM22 (talk) 14:25, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Didn't mean to suggest that, but perhaps you'll have better luck than me.

I know, but it's up to the numismatic task force to improve the coverage, including images! I've e-mailed the NBS to ask permission to use the uniface image they have up on Flickr.-RHM22 (talk) 14:50, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I've seen images of that. That would do fine. The medal is not rare but doesn't pop up every day and I don't care to buy one anyway.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

F and A

Weh, thx for edit; I've been very pressed for time with RL work (big deadline Tuesday). Got dabomb87 ready to do more than normal; he says east coast Sunday earliest. I'll be able to get back in for little swoops only. Tony (talk) 15:22, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. With two promotions, I have the page watchlisted!--Wehwalt (talk) 15:31, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

GA Jefferson nickel

I have placed the article on hold so that you can address a few concerns. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 19:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mercury dime

Hello! Your submission of Mercury dime at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rosiestep (talk) 03:06, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Good news, everyone!

The A-Class Review for the Frank Buckles article was closed and promoted just moments ago. I want personally thank you for your help on the article and hope to work again with you on the FAC in the near future. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 10:25, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Congrats, that is some improvement since I last saw it.--NortyNort (Holla) 10:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! :) I had a lot of help from a lot of really good edits like Wehwalt. This was most definitely a major collabrative effort. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 10:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks I'd move on to FAC!--Wehwalt (talk) 12:07, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Gough

Hi. Regarding this. I linked Fraser because it's the beginning of a major new section, the Constitutional Crisis of 1975, which attracts far more attention than the earlier parts of Whitlam's premiership. Fraser gets a photo in this new section, but although his name is "Malcolm Fraser" in the photo caption, it's just "Fraser" in the text, and no link in either place. That's fine if one is reading the whole article sequentially, but very often that's not what happens. If one wants to find a link to Fraser's article, one must hunt around in the previous section for his name, which could involve invoking a Ctrl-F search (as I just had to do) if you're not great at spotting individual words in a haystack of text. All rather user-unfriendly, don't you think? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 13:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

That's fine. Just thought you hadn't seen the link.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:31, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jefferson nickel

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Adam Eckfeldt

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 22 April 2011 (UTC)