User talk:B.Wind

Welcome to Wikipedia

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. You may want to take a look at the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers such as yourself:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
• Meet other new users
• Learn from others
• Play nice with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 22:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Florida State Route 869

Is there a reason you copied the text of Florida State Road 869 here? I have replaced it with a redirect. --SPUI (talk) 08:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

To coin a phrase, SPUI -- interesting. By the way, did you replace the picture that disappeared from the Florida State Roads page? If you don't intend to do so, the template should be deleted. B.Wind 19:58, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

There's a current problem with display of some images - if it's not fixed soon I'll work around it. --SPUI (talk) 00:13, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

In Living Color Wikicity

Since you talked about how The show In Living Color about Keenen Ivory Wayans and how it was getting worse i invite you to see my In Living Color Wikicity if you like it please leave a reply on the discussion on the Main Page thank you [1]

Stubs

Thanks for the classification of the WV articles! It saved me a lot of time! (since I would have had to do it, and I'm swamped right now) --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 07:59, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Glad to help out, but there is quite a bit of work ahead of you there... Several of your state route pages have ONLY the templates - no information about the roads themselves. B.Wind 08:23, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Penthouse models

They all came up in one hit because I found them all in one hit, splintered off the List of Penthouse Pets, where all the information that can be merged already is located. I apologise if the mass of nominations worries or confuses you. Saberwyn 09:01, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

No confusion here -- between the 1970 Penthouse models and the Hong Kong students, this morning's collection of AfDs resembled a theme package. Thank goodness for Mr. Cut and Ms. Paste for easy repetitive voting! B.Wind 09:06, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

One dollar Federal Reserve Note

I noticed the deletion debate here has fizzled somewhat, but I made some changes to the articles that may further illustrate the points I had been trying to make. Please take a look and let me know what you think. Paul 23:02, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Gladly! As a child, I collected coins and paper currency. I'll follow up both here and on your user page. B.Wind 03:06, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Here goes....

Hi Paul, I see what you're doing with U.S. one dollar bill. Your additions enhance the article, but I suspect that you'll (metaphorically) paint yourself in a corner with the different type of notes (USN, FRN, SC,...) here... and, most likely, a similar repetition with each of the other denominations. May I suggest the following (I think I mentioned it in the AfD discussion, but my short term memory isn't the greatest, either):

Set up a section entitled U.S. currency types (or more appropriate name). In it put the description of the red seal USN, blue seal (or brown seal) SC, Hawaii notes, yellow seal GC, etc. with a general description of the various types (after all, do we need detailed repetition between the $1 US Note and the $5 US Note?) and representative pictures of various denominations.

This will cut down on the duplications, and - more importantly - "free up" U.S. one dollar bill (and others) for sections dealing with the evolution of the design over the years. Ditto the other denominations. It will be more challenging for you, but in the long run the results will be far more rewarding for you and more interesting for the so-called "average" reader (I'm partial to the large notes that were circulated prior to 1920 myself).

I hope this helps. Good luck! I'll stop by from time to time and check (I'm in the middle of the Florida State Roads project myself - thank goodness I can write about my local streets!). B.Wind 03:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

FRNs

Your idea might be the best of all, as much as I liked my own idea it is a) cumbersome, I admit and b) not going to be popular, ever. I might give that a try when I get back into heavy editing (tomorrow or the day after - I seriously have no life and edit all day, but I'm taking a day off.) Anyway, I'm not sure what the best title would be...Issues of United States paper currency might be the best, to describe USN, FRN, FRBN, etc. Thanks for the idea and keep in touch. Paul 04:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry about popularity, Paul - just write the best article you can think of. If it's worthwhile, people will like it. B.Wind 04:23, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Incivility on a AfD page?

At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/People reported to be born in the Kaaba you said that I had personally attacked Striver. I thought I'd succeeded in keeping my temper. Could you explain wherein I failed? Zora 19:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

For the most part, you were fine, Zora - compared to some of the name callers, you were downright civil (and if this were a different forum I'd be blocking or suspending some of the name callers for the ad hominem attacks). On the other hand, they are responding to something that they viewed as an attack (and, no, I don't wish to step into something that has clearly been going on for awhile). I phrased my objection so that I can both remain neutral in this religious food fight and also ensure that I could be percieved as neutral. On the other hand, it does seem that when a valid objection is being made, there appears to be no conciliation or compromise with you (I based this on the talk or AfD on at least two three articles, if I remember correctly... and one thing that I've learned the hard way over the years is that when you see someone with a flaming torch headed in your direction, you don't douse him/her with gasoline/petrol).

And reading the articles in question gives me the impression that they're being inflamed. They're provoking you, of course, but I had to say something at this point before it goes far beyond edit wars.

Do I think that you engaged in a personal attack with/in the articles in question? Not really, but at the same time, you are engaging in a religious "battle" spanning centuries (not unlike some of the gems over which the various denominations of Christianity have battled over the years). After all (if the accusation is true), you don't just say that you're going to present both sides of the controversy and then misstate or misrepresent the position of the other side, and I get the impression that more than one person thought that this happened. B.Wind 20:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

---

Are you suggesting that I'm a Sunni? I'm a non-Muslim, a Buddhist. My horse in this race is the academic version of events (which dismisses the story as a myth). If you see anger and contempt leaking out (and I admit that they are there -- I have a LONG history with Striver) it's of the evolutionary-biologist-arguing-with-creation-scientist order.

I don't see this story as essential to Shi'a Islam (for an academically solid, thoughtful book by a Shi'a, see Reza Aslan's No God But God) and that's why Striver's position just baffles me. I don't understand preferring myth to what is scientifically or historically demonstrable. I don't understand religion that's based on believing contrafactuals. As a Buddhist, all I have to believe is that there was a guy named Buddha and he said stuff, which I find useful <g>.

Nevertheless, I'm trying to present the Shi'a position fairly. I tend to go head on with Striver when he insists on writing the other positions as well -- in this case, insisting that Sunni believe the birth-in-Kaaba story. I'm not sure that this is demonstrated, though it's possible I could be proved wrong. Zora 21:27, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I have no conclusions as to your religious affiliation, nor do I wish to entangle myself in such with anybody. As for your other points, I'll simply mention here what I mentioned on Striver's talk page: you two should get together and try to write ONE article... and document the stuffing out of everything you assert. There's nothing wrong with "agreeing to disagree": other religions and denominations have been doing it for centuries. My suggestion is to look for commonality first and then the both of you to acknowledge each other's position whenever (and wherever) there is an irreconcilable difference. The last thing we want is to draw a Wikipedia reader into a raging battle. B.Wind 21:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Here's a thought from my 20 years of teaching experience and other observations -- strong emotions preclude analytic thought. That's why people who reduce stress do better on exams than those who cram up until exam time. I sense a similarity in the science-vs.-religion debates going on: true scientific analysis precludes faith (an emotion), and anything based on emotion tends to preclude scientific analysis. B.Wind 21:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Answer

You wrote:

I am dismayed at the lack of civility that was displayed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/People reported to be born in the Kaaba. Regardless of the validity of your objection to the position of another editor (or vice version), personal attacks have no place in Wikipedia -- period. This includes calling him/her a liar, a "dense dick," and/or a bigot. Such attacks actually reflect more on you than on your target -- and it can persuade people to take up positions against you. I'm sure you don't want that.

Asking someone to not be a dense dick is in accordance to WP principles, just in case you didnt click on the links.

Asking her to stop lying is not a personal attack, it is a resonable request, considering what i proved and presented.

Calling her a bigot is a personal attack. a very accurate one in Zoras case, but you have right, i will discontinue calling her for what she is.

It seems to me that you and Zora are continuing a centuries-old battle between two denominations.

I am Shi'a. Do you see any several Sunnis opposing me? Do you see some Sunnis opposing me? Do you even see one single sunni opposing me? No?

look closly, it is only one person, the one i called with the "accurate description" that is opposing me, despite a sea of evidence contradicting her. Take and look at the talk page of any random Islamic article and you will see her, and often only her, opposing me without any good justification.

It is really simple: I give evidence, she puts her fingers in her eyes and shouts "SHI'A POV, SHI'A POV, SHI'A POV, I DONT CARE, SHI'A POV, I DONT CARE, I DONT CARE, I DONT CARE, I DONT CARE, I DONT CARE" no matter what i do, no matter what i evidence i present, no mater how good my arguments is. For her, the frase "Shi'a pov" equates "I dont want it in Wikipedia", no matter the pov or NPOV of the topic in hand.

This is NOT about any Shi'a-Sunni dispute, this is about one person being... yeah, the b word. Do go to the article and look at the definition

Instead of battling it out (and if I were an admin, I would have deleted both the articles in question as vandalism targets), why not attempt to show both Sunni and Shi'a positions on the objects of controversy (it would not be unlike a comparison between Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism in some aspect) and document the stuffing out of your positions? That would make far more sense than the insanity that's going on between you two right now... and you both get something constructive out of this. B.Wind 21:12, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

It is simple: When it IS Shi'a pov, i add it to the Shi'a section. In those cases, there is no problem what so ever.

The problem comes when Zora does not like the issue. In those cases, it really does not matter what pov or NPOV it is, she labels it Shi'a pov, shuvs it in the Shi'a section and if posible [2] [3], she just delets it outright [4] [5]. Just look at this to see how much enrergy is needed to make her accept something that is verfied by me and six other sources!--Striver 01:49, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

• You don't have to convince me if Zora is truthful or not, for, frankly, I'd rather not be a referee between the two of you. Calling someone on liar or a "dense dick" on a AfD discussion is name-calling no matter how you justify your actions. Name-calling is name-calling regardless of its accuracy. It is clear that the contention between the two of you has run long and run deep -- but I am sure I am not alone when I express that you two take your fights elsewhere, say... your own discussion pages? But, please, when you write through Wikipedia, please keep in mind that this is a public forum that demands CIVILITY. Had someone written or spoken to you (or about you) in the same manner that you had posted on the AfD discussion, you would be rightfully upset, too.

As stated above, I don't care what your religious denomination is. While you might (or might not) view it as part of your being, I view it as trivia best left alone. There are too many "hot buttons" and all that - but if a Wikipedia article is getting you that worked up about the person who wrote it, you're taking this far too seriously for anybody's health, especially yours -- and the people who are caught in the crossfire. B.Wind 23:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

B-major

When I studied RC and saw B-major, my original speculation based on its title was that it was an article on the B major scale. However, I saw it was on something random. I wrote on your Afd page a question about the article. Georgia guy 00:14, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

• You have faster fingers than I have -- I'm still learning the process of AfD, and you're just too fast. This orphaned article is about a performer rap music producer using that stage name. B.Wind 00:18, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

You know, I just realized what that + is for... :)

Thanks for backup on the JLEG-related vfd's. I don't like taking crap from some anonybozo. D.valued 00:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem! I call 'em as I see 'em, and your point was a valid one. That vote must've touched a nerve as someone has since vandalized my user page from three different computers in the same school. B.Wind 17:20, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry

I hope I didn't come off like a jerk. My frustrations were more towards the people (mostly tha anonymous fellow) who were casting aspursions on my character. I also put a great deal of effort into creating the Angels Wake article. Anyway, I apologize to you or anyone else that didn't deserve it if I was rude at all. If you don't think the band is notable enough, fine. I respect your opinion. I just really like the band and since I know a bit about them and I honestly do think they're notable enough (even if it's just barely) to be included. I think any band or artist that can be verified (has a website that isn't geocities or angelfire), has at least one CD, has a reasonable underground following, has played a number of live shows (and gotten paid for them), gets airplay from radio stations (even indy ones) and has some sort of media coverage (Even if they aren't on the cover of rolling stone) should be considered notable enough to be included. Anyway, I hope you understand my position. I've added and edited several things now, and any constructivie criticism you would like to give me regarding past, present or future articles is welcome. Thanks! -Timothy R. --TaeKwonTimmy 04:59, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

• Tim, you didn't come off as anything close to a jerk at all -- you fought the good fight (albeit a bit overheatedly), and I hope that you realized that my contributions to the discussion were in the hope of helping you out. The problem was that your article arrived too early. Give it time, and if/when the band gets the notice that you believe it should get, that will the the proper time for an article. I wish you (and the band) all the best... and please don't let the editorial dust-up get to you. Not everything that is submitted for publication gets printed on the first attempt; not every article in Wikipedia survives an AfD. Good luck... and keep writing! B.Wind 20:14, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Semi-Protection

In regards to your email, you can request that an administrator semi-protect your user page at [6]. Hope this helps --NaconKantari 21:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

• Many thanks, --NaconKantari. The request has been made. Let's hope this stems the tide of vandalism on my user page. B.Wind 22:08, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I've semi-protected your userpage: log. Contact me, or post an unprotection request at WP:RPP if you want it unprotecting. Izehar 22:10, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

• Many thanks, Izehar, for the semi-protection. Let's see if this will do the trick. B.Wind 22:12, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

You can add the template {{sprotected}} if you want. I logged out and tried to edit your userpage and couldn't, so semi-protection actually works. It's a rather new feature, so we are all quite suspicious of it. I'm suprised you wanted your userpage semi-protecting, mine has been vandalised many times - I keep a vandal counter on my userpage :-) Izehar 22:18, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I may be putting another request soon. The revertbots and vandalism squad have been quite busy reverting vandalism edits... all from one immature anon. I have reason that this is the same one that was using my User page for target practice the first time. B.Wind 01:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Florida State Roads

Thanks for the note. I'm fairly familiar with the roads in the Tallahassee, Daytona Beach and (less so) Tampa Bay areas, so I'll be adding those as I go along. - Aerobird 04:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Redirects and deletions

One of them being nominated was by User:SPUI - the reason he provided was this link; you might want to discuss this with him to see what he thinks. --HappyCamper 03:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

• It was improperly done, as I've mentioned both on your talk page and the redirect's talk page. If SPUI were that determined to get rid of it, the appropriate way was RfD, not CSD... or he could have done the proper thing and write the appropriate article in question. Deletion accomplished nothing positive, and (from the viewpoint of a few Florida State Roads editors who contacted me while I was away) the fallout continues. The feedback I received is that none of them are being respected by him, and his recent heavy-handed tactics (including the meaningless insistence on reporting the lengths of the roads to the nearest five feet... and usually on articles not started by him) are feeding to the general bad feelings. It's a shame as we are all here for the common cause, and if we work together with no personal agendas, Wikipedia's readers would be much better for it. B.Wind 00:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

'Redland' vs. 'Redlands'

It is entirely possible that there never has been a standard name for the area, and that both forms have been used. It is also possible that 'Redland' is an innovation. I see too many places where local writers construct a 'history' for an area from dubious information. Ah, the importance of credible sources. :)

The old books can still be cited, I've done so in articles I've worked on. The more accessible a source is, the better, but if you're using sources you found in a library, that should be fine. I have a number of 40- to 50-year old books on Florida here at home that my father collected. Unfortunately, none of them cover southern Dade County.

By the way, are you aware of Wikipedia:Wikiproject Florida? You can join by signing in the Members section of the project page, and there is no particular obligation involved. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 11:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

You might be able to use the public records to find the answer. With [7] you can select a piece of property and click on the link to the left (after "Folio No.:") to find the plat book (first line of the legal description). This sometimes has the name of the area as platted. You can also look at the plat with [8] (uses Java) - the standard search for post-1974 plats and the old search for pre-1974. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 07:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Recently I've found a gold mine of such information - the details of the source can be found at Talk:State Road 908 (Florida). I found the book in the reference section of the library of Miami Dade College - Wolfson Campus, should anybody which to read it in downtown Miami (if they can't find another copy). B.Wind 20:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

1983 renumbering

How precise do you have this renumbering down? In other words, did it definitely happen in 1983, or could it have been a year earlier or later? Is it also possible that it was done in two parts? (See Talk:Former State Roads in southern Florida.) --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 06:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

• The major part of it was done in 1983, according to three sources. If I said in an article that it was done in 1983, at least two sources indicated that year. If I said "about 1983" or "mid 1980s" either I had only one source indicating the year or I can only "pin it" to that "neighborhood." I don't post something definite in an article unless I can find two independent sources for the information (as everybody should as anything prepared by humans could have errors or are incomplete); and if there are multiple sources with conflicting information, then I acknowledge it (as I did for SR 989 and the possibly mythical SR 9823) as a good objective journalist or encyclopedia article writer should. In Dade/Miami-Dade County, some changes were occurring in the 1990s (like the decommissioning of SR 815, which I still cannot pin down yet as it was unsigned before it started vanishing from the road maps). B.Wind 01:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

• • Can you give those sources? (Possibly in an article dealing with the renumbering, so we can link there in each route that was renumbered, rather than giving the sources in every article.) --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 20:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

State Road 805 (Florida)

You wrote that SR 805 carries only southbound US 1. Has this changed recently? [9] clearly shows US 1 north going with SR 805. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 07:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

• All you have to do is note the location of the sign and you'll have your answer. As of last year, SR 805 and SR 5 was still a one-way pair. I am not aware of any rerouting of traffic since I last visited downtown West Palm Beach in December 2004. If I have a chance on Sunday, I'll see if it's still the case... it's been awhile since I rode Tri-Rail. B.Wind 01:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

• • I don't understand what you mean. That sign, as far as I can tell, is at the northbound split between SR 5 and SR 805 in Lantana. I'm aware that north of Belvidere Road in West Palm Beach, there is a one-way pair. However, every source I have (mainly aerial photos) ends this one-way pair at Belvidere Road. FDOT GIS data only shows SR 805 south of Belvidere - north of Belvidere both roads are SR 5. Though, looking at the latest data, it may have changed recently. SR 5 is shown as locally maintained from the West Palm Beach Canal to SR 80 and from Belvidere Road to SR 704 westbound. The connection from SR A1A south to SR 704, one block west of SR 5 southbound, is shown as a section of SR 5.

• • The pavement management report however does not agree with those sections of local maintenance, so it may be an omission from the data. (There are several similar ones in other places after recent construction - was there any recent construction here?) The pavement management report even says "begin 1 way pair" at Belvidere Road on the entry for SR 5. Belvidere is where 93050000 (SR 805) becomes 93020001 (SR 5).

• • The SR A1A-SR 704 connection is shown in the pavement report, and it looks like it was just taken over a year or two ago. Any idea how this is signed? TO A1A and TO 704?

• • Basically, I know that SR 5/US 1 is a one-way pair north of Belvidere Road in West Palm Beach. South of there, through Lake Worth, is where SR 805 exists. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 20:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

That vandal

You're welcome--I spotted that one on RC patrol; he had a disturbing edit history of vandalising user pages interspersed with making minor valid edits, and erasing warnings on his own talk page. Best wishes, Antandrus (talk) 06:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Florida State Road A1A Alternate

Greetings:

Regarding the discussion at Florida State Road A1A Alternate → State Road 707 (Florida), I would like to suggest that a redlink in this case would, in fact, be better than a bluelink.

User:SPUI is correct, as infuriating as that can occasionally be. Redirects which could plausibly target more than one article should not simply point to one of those targets. At the very least, it should be a disambiguation page. With this in mind, my initial thought was that I would disambiguate the redirect myself, and everyone could laud me for my Solomon-like wisdom.

However, after some investigation, it seems that Florida State Road A1A Alternate is linked only from one other article: State Road A1A (Florida). And the place where it's linked contains, as a parenthetical comment, the exact list of the roads that Florida State Road A1A Alternate turned into. In other words, the entries I would use to fill out the disambiguation page are already right there where the link to the disambiguation page would go. Which, I'm sure you will agree, would make a disambiguation page rather redundant.

One of the things we take into account in closing out RFD nominations is whether Wikipedia as a whole would be better served with a redlink or a bluelink where the nominated redirect currently exists. Redlinks encourage interested parties to add to Wikipedia's collection of knowledge and information. Bluelinks aren't always clicked on. And sometimes even when they are clicked on, people don't notice that it's a redirect. Or people notice that it's a redirect but may think that they can't expand a redirect into an article or a stub. Or they don't know how to do so.

As it currently stands, Wikipedia has a hole in its information where Florida State Road A1A Alternate should be. There appears to be an interesting history to this road, and I feel it would be better to encourage interested parties to add that history to Wikipedia. As pointed out above, a redlink would encourage this in a way that a bluelink wouldn't.

Since redirects which could plausibly point to more than one article should not simply point to one of those articles, and since I feel Wikipedia would be better served by a redlink in this particular case, I am exercising my prerogative as closing admin to delete the redirect, even though you have voted that the redirect should be kept. (The vote from the anon IP is being discounted, as anon IP votes usually are in most xFD discussions.) It is my hope that you find my arguments for doing so to be persuasive. If not, I welcome reasoned commentary. I have no emotional investment in this issue, and would be willing to reverse my decision if a suitably compelling argument were made. Feel free to respond either here or on my talk page, whichever you find most convenient, in the event that you would like to convince me of the error of my ways.

In any event, I felt that you deserved a fuller explanation of my reasoning than could be provided in the closing notes.

All the best.
Ξxtreme Unction|_{yakkity yak} 13:31, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

• I appreciate the message, but if you truly believed it, you would have not written it as if you were trying to convince yourself that the decision was correct. I have been told by numerous admins that a useful redirect is far preferable to a redlink. The deleted redirect was indeed a useful one, as it led to the one article that mentions the topic in depth. The actual motivation is not irrelevant: you made a call, and it was the wrong one. I now wash my hands of it and urge the proposer of the deletion (SPUI) or the admin who made the call to do the proper thing and write the article that they have in mind to replace the redirect, as the deletion made Wikipedia poorer, not richer, for it. B.Wind 15:13, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Compromise on precision

Do you have any objection to giving figures to two decimal places? This is what the FHWA rounds to in their Interstate Route Log and Finder Guide, and I have seen many other official records given to that precision. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 20:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

• A 50-foot uncertainty (half the width of Florida State Road 94) is more realistic and reasonable than a five-foot uncertainty (half the width of a lane on the Overseas Highway). Let us remember that we are writing for the reader and not ourselves... and who is most likely to be reading the articles after we are finished writing them? B.Wind 15:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Bot

My apoligies... forgot about routeboxes when I hit "replace all."

In regards to the naming stuff, we have a RFC started and WP:NC/NH. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup tags on state road pages

As noted on the Talk:State Road 11 (Florida) page: the "expand" tag (which is the proper template in this case, not "cleanup"), seems redundant on a stub-tagged page...

As for expanding the pages, I would, but 'fraid I don't have much I can add... - Aerobird 01:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

"When you fight an asshole, the asshole always wins."

Did you have any specific Wikipedia editors in mind when you posted this on your User page, or is it just a coincidence that SPUI seems determined to win at all costs? Where did you find that quotation? It's great! 147.70.242.39 00:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

• Actually, it's an original that I first posted in my www.xanga.com quotation page. The story behind it I'd rather not mention here, but I assure you that although it might fit that "certain Wikipedia author" (in which I would jokingly say "You win" immediately after saying that to him - if it weren't for his being most highly unreasonable in the revert wars that involve us). But I wouldn't say specifically who it is as it could violate WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA, although he doesn't believe either of them apply to him. B.Wind 04:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:COUNTY-TRANSIT-LOGO.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:COUNTY-TRANSIT-LOGO.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:04, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

• • NOTE: for some reason, it didn't want to take the logo tag - after two attempts, I forced the issue through "edit this page". It's now tagged as a logo. B.Wind 05:16, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

SR 582

What evidence do you have that this goes west of Florida Ave? Just curious. On its page you have stated that it goes to Lake Fern. TimL 23:04, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, my contribution to that article has been limited to adding and removing a {{cleanup}} tag (and later realizing it should have been an {{expand}} instead). As I am not as familiar with Gulf Coast roads as I am with Atlantic Coast roads in Florida, I shall double-check my maps and make the necessary revisions, if any, unless someone beats me to the punch. B.Wind 23:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite is complete. It's not great, but it will do as a stub. I removed the information that I could not verify with the maps I have, and put a request for verifiable information on any prior configurations of SR 582. I hope this meets with your approval, Tim. B.Wind 00:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, if you need evidence of the Tarpon Springs extension of SR 582, I can send you some photographs, as well as some maps. In the meantime, I have to learn how to create my profile for this site. DanTD 20:49 23 May 2006

Michael Axelrod AFD

I don't usually contact other voters on AFDs, the reason I'm letting you know is because I think you've misjudged the AFD due to some ambiguity in the article, as I too thought the same when I first read it. Michael Axelrod seems to have little or no connections to Barack Obama, it is his father, David Axelrod of which is the case. I do not follow American politics closely, so I can't be sure, but that's what I thought from reading the article. Of course, I respect your vote, but am just letting you know in case you were misguided. - Hahnchen 19:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

You are correct about Obama - I misread the first part, but for the time being, the contretemps in the basketball game still make him notable as he has had internation exposure as a result. His fifteen minutes may be ending, but it's too early to delete or merge the article in my opionion. Thank you for the correction, and I will modify my comment accordingly. Many thanks. B.Wind 19:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

"State of the art"

Yeah, I was going to say something to the effect of "Is a system built in 1983 still state-of-the-art?" in my edit summary, but I decided that it would be just too mean. For the record, I live in Baltimore, and the subway here was built at the same time as Miami's -- the two cities shared an order of rail cars, so the systems and rolling stock are much alike, and I definitely wouldn't call our system state of the art! --Jfruh (talk) 22:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Ambrose

Interesting development on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Ambrose. Ambrose is continuing to add POV material to his article through an IP, even after he seemed to agree to let a "third party" [his quotations] edit it. --JChap 00:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm much more concerned with the mass deletion of the comments on the AfD page and hope that an admin intervenes and metes some Wikijustice. B.Wind 01:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

An admin moved those comments to a Talkpage. --JChap 01:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

The removal of two "votes" skews the discussion even more. I am boldly restoring them to the discussion. B.Wind 01:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Have you dealt with MostWanted05 or the 86.xxxx user?

I have no choice, I will report this person to the Wikipedia commitee. He choose to continue the "think I own this site" excuse "over-and-over" again! Wikipedia:Requests for comment/user:MostWanted05 Any thoughts? Thanks. LILVOKA. 31 May 2006 04:33 (UTC)

I haven't dealt with him/her/it - and the only time I did anything with the Black Wall Street Records article was "researching" and "verifying" for an AfD for one of its artists. I wish I can provide something of substance for you, but I haven't witnessed anything that you haven't seen firsthand (as it is, I'm in a little revert war of my own on a couple of fronts with someone else who has just finished going through RfC). If the article gets too out of hand, there's still AfD (if too much inaccurate, unsourced, information is there), reporting 3RR violations, and requesting protection if vandalism gets out of hand. Just document the stuffing out of your charges. B.Wind 04:41, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

AfD N. Nagaraja

I raised a new issue at the AfD page that you might affect your vote. I'm contacting all the past discussants. --Kchase02 (T) 20:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

• It doesn't change my vote at all, nor does it address the issues I raised in my discussion. It's a badly-written recreation of a deleted article. As for the issue of the person/people in question in the Bangalore assembly being (non)notable, the assembly is on the same notability level as a state assembly in a U.S. state or a legislator for a Canadian province, which in itself is insufficient. The article as it stands must go IMO. Thank you for the heads up! B.Wind 04:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your opinion. The relevant guideline, Wikipedia:Notability (people), indicates that members of provincial legislatures are notable, but I'm guessing from your response that won't do it. --Kchase02 (T) 05:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

If notability is based solely on participation in the legislative process on the state/province level, and nothing else, I'd say that it's insufficient. A freshman legislator in the West Virginia Assembly would not reach sufficient notability simply by being there; and the issue being raised was whether or not the subject of the article in question was there in the first place. To me, that is a nonissue based on the above reasoning. Even if the answer were "yes" the article needs a complete revamp to make it encyclopedic, and frankly, I do not know if it's worth the effort. B.Wind 05:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Effort for a questionable article over strict process. I can appreciate that. --Kchase02 (T) 07:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Comment from Roger C. Ambrose

FYI: I have posted a comment: [10]
Roger ambrose 01:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)