User:Valfontis/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Mt.Hood

This is User:Furon. I am sorry about Mt. Hood, but I posted rumors, although this is now true. Sorry for the screw-up.

--Furon 02:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion?

Not sure if it was indeed a deleted image or not, but the University of Oregon academic seal is no longer showing on the University of Oregon page, nor any of the pages in its history. I believe it happened after someone updated the image code in the infobox, but I'm not sure. I've tried reverting that section of code back, but the image doesn't show up again.

I'm asking you since you seem to be very knowledgable in Wiki, do you know how to undelete the image or...something? Cluskillz 19:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey there, just wanted to let you know I got your message. Thanks for the compliment, but I'm not so knowledgable about images, but I'll take a look tomorrow and see what I can do. Sometimes it has to do with the image that is in the commons... Katr67 04:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi sorry this took me a while to get back to. It looks like the image was deleted, I checked the deletion log: "Image with unknown copyright status as of 29 December 2006". There's been a lot of this going around lately. *sigh* Seems like the UO seal would be fair-use. I try to steer clear of the copyright issues, so I don't know what using the seal would entail...plenty of other college articles have them, so it shouldn't be too hard to figure out... Katr67 00:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with embedded external links?

You seem to have a no-tolerance policy, but I don't see the harm (in the absense of there being a Wikipedia article to link to) in giving readers a shortcut vs. having to copy-and-paste a phrase into a search engine to find more information, so long as what is linked to is appropriate given Wikipedia's policies and the overall effect isn't that of a link directory. (I'm thinking of recent edits you've made to Maplewood, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Oregon.) Could you explain your reasoning?--ScottMainwaring 18:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Scott, I've probably under the influence of WikiProject Spam--they're *really* hardcore. I have a pretty flexible policy, actually. But my rationale is that by wikilinking rather than embedded linking, hopefully someone will see that, for example, the rollerderby team needs an article. I think embedded links discourage this, and that putting the external link after the redlink just clutters the page, though it is a better solution. As for Maplewood, I doubt the church merits an article and I'm not real sure we want to encourage links to every organization that happens to be in a neighborhood. In fact, I'm not even sure a listing of churches is particularly encyclopedic, but I left that section there because I don't want to be accused of any bias. So that's my reasoning--feel free to put the links back if you want. And I'd like to thank you for keeping the Portland article tidy. Sometimes when I'm in a hurry and I see a dubious edit, I think, "Oh I bet ScottMainwaring will take care of it." :) Happy editing! P.S. We talked once about the communities categories--did you see that Hmains has spruced them all up? Katr67 00:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reason not to use footnotes to address this need? I know they don't work in every situation, but would something like [[Maplewood Church]]<ref>http://www.mwchurchsite.com</ref> work? -Pete 22:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd find it hard to quarrel with that. :) Katr67 22:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Katr67, thanks for the kind words, and for the explanation, which certainly makes sense, though I have to say I'm personally not a fan of redlinks (aesthetics) or of footnotes that mean something different than "here's evidence for this claim" or "here's additional editorial commentary that doesn't merit being in the text itself". But I don't have a constructive alternative to propose... --ScottMainwaring 01:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi, this is Martin1971 from Vienna, Austria. Thank you for your friendly welcome greetings and your spellcheck of the Sager orphans. Martin1971 17:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Yamhill County Post Offices

Actually, the Yamhill County Genealogical Society in McMinnville, Oregon.--Zinc2005 19:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

South Tabor

Thanks for the immediate attention to South Tabor! Always nice when a stub gets some love right away. -Pete 22:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. I have a lot of redlinks on my watchlist... Helpful or obsessive? You decide. ;) Katr67 22:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Interstate 82

Yeah, that was my mistake. I saw the edit and gave it a quick look, and at first it looked like cleanup to me (and part of it was). It wasn't until I checked a second time after you asked me about it that I saw the inappropriate blanking. I've done a major cleanup to the article, and restored some of the stuff the IP had blanked. Take a look at it now and tell me what you think. -- NORTH ^talk 23:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

likeresume

oooh, I like that tag. Glad to know it! Is there a similar one for "like campaign materials?" -Pete 21:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

If there isn't, there should be... Katr67 22:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Sal Esquivel

Hi- I'm confused by your recent edit of Oregon statewide elections, 2006. Are you sure that the 2006 election was the event that moved Esquivel from the Senate to the House, or did that possibly occur earlier? I originally created that page using data from the state's web site, so it seems unlikely that I would have gotten one legislator wrong, as I was working from an authoritative list. Also, Oregon House of Representatives lists Esquivel as a Rep for the 2005 session. Of course, the Elections page was my first major wikipedia project, and I'll be the first to confess that I did a terrible job listing citations... -Pete 21:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused too. :P I just reverted my changes. Yes, he was the rep for the 2005 session. I was looking through the list and using Google trying to figure out who the freshman senators and reps were. I ran across this page, which seems to indicate that he was neither an incumbent nor a challenger, but I remembered his name from the 2005 session, so I after a little digging (not enough, apparently) I went ahead and assumed that he had made the jump *after* winning the election, not before. I've said it before, but apparently the Oregonian copydesk needs more beatings. :) Katr67 22:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I think I just found our answer -Pete 22:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC):

In March of 2003, Sal was chosen to replace Senator Lenn Hannon to represent District 3, which includes the cities of Medford, Ashland, Phoenix, Talent, Jacksonville and part of the Applegate region. Shortly after his appointment, Representative Rob Patridge announced that he would not be running again for his State Representative position. Sal chose to run for the House seat of District 6 because he knows Medford so well after almost eight years on the City Council. He served out the nine months remaining in the Senate, garnering knowledge and experience to take to the House of Representatives.

Inza Wood Middle School

ANNOUNCEMENT:

This page is for a creative writing class, and we would prefer if you would not mess with it.

Thank You,

Ted —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Teddibear4774 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia is not here for you use for your creative writing. Katr67 22:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do not edit Inza Wood Middle School, as it was created for a class project and we will get our teacher to verify this. Email Boonec@wlwv.k12.or.us

We will add a note at the bottom that says that this is for a school project and not to be taken seriously. We will also add the real version under the fake part.

Thank You,

Teddibear4774 22:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion has been moved to the article's talk page. Katr67 22:46, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

User warnings have been updated

Hey there, take a look at WP:UTM. Looks like the old warnings are being deprecated in favour of some new ones. --Brad Beattie (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'm using the RC script, which automatically generates the warnings, so that will need to be updated, I guess. Katr67 18:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

months off

Clearly, you were having a look around and getting a feel for the place, to prepare for an all-out assault on sub-standard articles! A practice NOT to be discouraged in any way. By the way, I just about spat out my coffee when I saw your "nestled" google link. Priceless. -Pete 19:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Heh. I was actually able to let a "nestled" (a "cozily nestled" no less!) stand in the Salem, Oregon article for several days. I swear someone out there is testing me... And hey look, that Gopher Valley Oregon article even starts with the word. Must go stamp it out... Katr67 20:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ooops! Seems we collided attempting to remove that pesky nestling. I looked very quickly to see what you changed, but might have undid some of your work. Sorry for any confusion. I'll fix in a few hours if you're not doing anything with the article. —EncMstr 20:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Just saw your note, I'll "wip" away. Thanks! Katr67 20:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: "Official website"

I actually don't know of any set guideline on the topic; I've been relying on precedent. I guess my preference for the term is that a number of articles will link to popular fan sites for an individual without the title making it clear it is the official site for that individual. That and the fact it's so widely used already it might be better for consistency. But I really don't know. I've brought the matter up at Wikipedia talk:External links#"Official website"; hopefully it gets some attention. Owen 22:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Creativity

Hey, Katr,

I was wondering if it is possible to create a new template-thingy such as This user is a citizen of the U.S.A., only new. I also have no idea how to create a message box, like this one, so, if you wish, reply on my user discussion page! Thanks!--Furon 20:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Roseburg Senior High School

Hello Katr67, Thank you for showing your concern about the name of Roseburg's high school. The official name of Roseburg's High School is "Roseburg Senior High School." Otherwise it would be a misnomer. You can search the name "Roseburg Senior High School" for schools you will find a search result of "Roseburg Senior High School" such as http://www.schoolmatters.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cheberling (talk • contribs) 21:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

Thanks. I don't consider the above a reliable source, but I do see that the school refers to itself as such here. Confusing for it to be RHS and not RSHS though. It's pretty unusual for a high school in Oregon to have "senior" in its name, that's why I was wondering. Happy editing! Katr67 21:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

A more authoritative source would be the Oregon Department of Education [1] which is why I moved it there. Alangdon86

OK, I concur. Good thing too because to move it back now I think we will have to involve an admin. Katr67 21:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Another good source is here. Katr67 21:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Gopher Valley, Oregon

I thank you for your edits to my article on Gopher. A little about me... I'm the Yamhill County Surveyor, a member of the board of directors of the Yamhill County Historical Society, and edit that organizations' newsletter, issued 9 times per year. "Gopher Valley" is the article I wrote for this months article. You are correct in stating the community was called Gopher. This was my first addition to Wikipedia. I submitted some of the information Lewis McArthur used in his latest edition of Oregon Geographic Names, relating to an early county road survey. However, I've not submitted the portion of the 1851 "Sketch of the Willamette Valley" to him, which takes the date of the place name back another 15 years or so. I'd like to insert a couple of neat photos, perhaps a scan of a portion of that sketch showing the name Gopher Hole, but I have no clue how to do the insertion. also, I see the warning to wait until all initial edits have been completed before doing any more to this.

Thanks again... you are light years ahead of me....

Dan Linscheid Sheridan, Oregon 503-843-2625 danl@starband.net

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Long Years in Space.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Long Years in Space.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 08:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

associations

thanks for your kind words. Yes, I noticed that the state associations have no over all category and I plan to work on them soon. Hmains 06:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Please look at Oregon associations now. Comments? Hmains 04:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Perfect. I think the intro ties it all together nicely. I couldn't really figure out how fencing, government and cheese were related. :P Thanks for taking care of it. Katr67 04:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ghost towns

It took awhile but I did some work on the Ghost towns project. Bring your friends. Also, I think you'll be pleased to see the new project userbox. I'll let you scope it out at the new and improved, albeit somewhat stolen, project page.A mcmurray 07:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Cool. I saw you were busy fixing it up. I'll put a note on the WikiProject Oregon page when I get a chance (I'm trying to keep my wikiaddiction down to a dull roar though.) :) Katr67 14:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

And that, that can be hard, so hard. I want to move to Oregon btw. :). And of course, something for your tireless efforts:

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		You even revert bot edits gone bad. For extraordinary diligence regarding Oregon, National Register of Historic Places and Ghost towns articles, specifically. Also for overall high-quality work on Wikipedia. A mcmurray 20:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

PPS

Hi! I'm not ignoring your request to edit the Salem and Corvallis pages - there have just been other things I felt more pressing. I will get to those! Meanwhile...would you mind weighing in on the talk page of Portland Public Schools, Oregon? Do you think that oughtta be linked to the "cleanup" page? I think it should have some opinions expressed by locals before unleashing the world of Wikipedia on it, but I'm curious what you think. -Pete 07:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey no worries. I've got a milliion things I have promised to do for people. I did fix up the transportation section in the Albany article. Yes, I'll take a look at the PDX schools page too. I unleashed the schools wikiproject on Roseburg High School and I found the results a lot more...sparse than I would have liked. Katr67 14:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Boasts NPOV?

Can you please explain why to boast how it was used in the Astoria article was NPOV? Boasting in general is definitely NPOV, but this is clearly a case of the second meaning of the verb, i.e., to have. -Yupik 19:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

You mean "POV", correct? The word "boasts" is overused, especially in articles about cities, which "boast" about various amenities with abandon. I think it is much simpler and clearer to use words like "has", etc. Through overuse in real estate ads and tourism promotion materials, this word has even been added to a 2007 Banished Words List. A quick Google search on Wiki will show you that far from being used in the context of "has", "boasts" generally is used by inexperienced writers who are proud of their city and seem to be copying their writing style from adverts. Thus when I see it in articles I usually replace it with a more neutral term. In terms of the Scandinavian population of Astoria, I believe that Scandinavian pride (not that there's anything wrong with that) has led someone to use the word "boasts" in terms of the second definition, which is, "To possess or own (a desirable feature)". However:

Some have objected to the use of boast as a transitive verb meaning "to possess or own a desirable feature," as in This network boasts an audience with a greater concentration of professionals and managers than any other network. This usage is by now well established, however, and is acceptable to 62 percent of the Usage Panel.

Count me among the other 38 percent. I believe in most uses the word "boast" is unencyclopedic. In any case, I think reverting the article again would accomplish very little. (See: WP:LAME) The article has worse problems than that. Katr67 20:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the links, but I did have a look with google first. I don't know how far back the use of the word "to boast" goes, but it's in the 1911 EB a number of times with the sense of "to possess a feature". It seems rather arbitrary to start claiming it's POV based on a list someone decided to come up with. Furthermore, it's impossible to back up a statement about it being mainly used by "inexperienced writers" ... in talking about desirable features of their towns when Google finds these type of results: "Ironically, this town boasts a large Amish population." In that sense, while you find it lame to keep "boasts" in the article, I find it was lame for it to have been changed in the first place as it was a useless edit, especially as it was not used in the sense of "to possess a desirable feature" as it was used in the sense of "to possess a feature". On that note, you might want to keep an eye on the changes made by the other user in that non-revert-war, as he liberally saturates articles with misspellings, incorrect grammar (singular verbs with plural nouns) and incorrect punctuation (portuguese in lowercase). Be prepared though that he considers any changes made to be personal attacks.

Slightly OT: a large international company I used to write for decided one day to forbid the use of the words "neither", "nor" and any combination thereof. The only reason given was that the company's Asian customers couldn't possibly understand any grammatical constructions using them. :D -Yupik 16:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll respond to the rest later, but: Please leave me out of your campaign against that particular user. Thanks. Katr67 17:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This is a weird place for this kind of discussion - what about the article's talk page? But as long as I'm here, I entirely agree that "boasts" is either unencyclopedic or uninformative. If it's considered synonymous with a word like "holds," then what precisely is the objection to using the word "holds?" In other words, while "boasts" may be controversial, surely "holds" is not - so Yupik, may I suggest you simply go with the word that satisfies all concerns? Oh the other hand - Katr, if the editor in question is approaching 3RR, I'd suggest moving the conversation to a more public place, and inviting input…rather than quoting policy (which could be MISinterpreted by an enthusiastic editor as being unnecessarily aggressive.) -Pete 02:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

This would probably be a good question to take public so that "boasts" could either be corrected or left alone according to a general consensus on Wikipedia. I apologize for my comments about Ruskeapää; I should have walked away from the situation instead of allowing myself to be annoyed by his edits. And Pete's comment about policyquoting is a good comment as it did seem like it was unnecessarily aggressive.

The reason why I object to "boasts" being changed is that I don't think that the English wikipedia really needs to be generalizing words because someone might have an issue with some word that is not objectional to a majority (in this case some 62%) of people as that's what the Simple English wikipedia can be used for in my opinion. But as Pete said, this would be a good topic to bring up somewhere else, on a page of words to be avoided perhaps? -Yupik 22:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Can someone slowly and clearly explain to me why quoting policy is agressive? I generally quote policy so people can see exactly how the wiki guideline is worded, rather than trust my memory and let them take my word that I "read somewhere" about some policy. If you mean my inclusion of LAME, well, I do think the edits in question were very minor and it would indeed have been lame to continue reverting them. It was not the inclusion of the word "boasts" I was calling LAME, but the revert war caused by it, as you will see by the silly examples on the humorous LAME page. In my opinion, the words were changed from adequate English to very precise English and it would be nonsensical to revert them, especially because I have the impression Yupik was wikistalking the other user. If my post was cranky, well, since your reversion of one user's edits seemed to based more on personal bias or the need to make a point than on an interest in grammar, yeah, that made me cranky. And though I didn't start this discussion here, I chose not to move it to the Astoria page because I didn't want to draw in that other user and start things all over again. (For the record, Yupik reverted twice, the other editor reverted once and I reverted once.) Now. Bringing this up at Wikipedia talk:Words to avoid sounds like it would generate an interesting discussion. Good idea. Though I suspect we would get very little guidance and certainly no firm policy about the use of the word. Unless *not* changing "boasts" to "has" is set down as an official guideline, I for one am certainly going to change the word "boasts" to "has" if I run across it in the articles I take an interest in. On the other hand, it would be LAME of me go around the entire wiki hunting down its usage and stamping it out. Katr67 23:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Yupik has ignored what I think was the most important aspect of my comment: namely, what is the value of continuing this argument, when it appears there is no reason NOT to use the word "holds?" Yupik appears to be taking things very personally, and I share Katr's perplexity about why that is. Remember that we're pretty much all in this together; if we choose to argue about relatively trivial matters, it disrupts the spirit of collaboration that is Wikipedia's greatest strength. So, once again: "boasts" is a word that has generated controversy. The word "holds" has not - it appears that the only reason Yupik objects to "holds" is that he/she has a strong attachment to the word "boasts." Yupik, I would personally be very gratified if you would simply accept the word "holds," and go back to making constructive contributions to Wikipedia - your "talk" page makes it very clear that you have excellent talents to share. -Pete 00:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Mainly because "holds" would not be suitable as far as I can tell in any cases that it's being changed from. To "has" would be ok. And please, I'm not taking it personally and I did get both of your points about it. Please do bring this up at Wikipedia talk:Words to avoid, I would be interested in hearing what other people have to say about this verb. Thanks. -Yupik 06:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy to see this discussion moving toward resolution. I have no preference between "holds" and "has." Perhaps a complete restructuring of the sentence would be the best bet? At any rate, I think there might be an important lesson here - that in an edit conflict, proceeding as though there are only two options may be a big mistake. I wish you luck in the "words to avoid" discussion; I personally have no interest in participating in a more general discussion of the word "boasts," but I think it's a worthwhile discussion to have. -Pete 22:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikia

Hey, Katr. I was just wondering if you know how to create a wikia, as I am wishing to create a wikia, called "Wiikipedia" Thanks.--Furon 20:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I have absolutely no clue. I'm more into the words, not the programming. Did you try Google? Katr67 21:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the greeting & an Oregon Ghost Town to add

Hi, Katr67! Thanks for the friendly welcome to the neighborhood. I've seen your footprints around some of my favorite pages.

I know you like Ghost Towns, and I've noticed that one of my favorites is missing from the Oregon list: Golden, Oregon. I've been there and it's a real nice one. Here are some links:

[2]

[3] (beware of music!)

[4]

[5]

Why don't you write it up?

--DaKine 05:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

White Train

I started a stub on the White Train based on the information I could find quickly (was looking for information for a paper I'm writing and I hate seeing nothing on such subjects). Saw you had a link from your userpage, and seeing the context there thought you might have something to say/do/add/desire to know. CheerioDarker Dreams 03:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Agree with you on the wine list

Sorry it took a while to get back, but I spent much of the weekend sick in bed with a nasty case of the flu. :)

The "notes" column is, as you said, intended to augment the existing fields. It isn't intended to list wine awards, especially as most such awards are meaningless. I'm not that familiar with the winery in question, but I'm certain that it shouldn't be given praise in Wikipedia in a place where Eyrie, Domaine Drouhin, or some of the other truly-notable wineries aren't praised.

I wouldn't worry about COI, unless it can be shown that a person is acting in an inappropriate manner. If someone did write an article about the winery that met our criteria (and wasn't overly promotional), that would be fine.

You might ask over at WikiProject Wine, to see what they think. I'm certain some of the folks over there will be rather uppity about a minor winery behaving in that fashion. :)

Talk to you later,

--EngineerScotty 18:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

List of Oregon ballot measures

Hi there! Hoping for a comment or two from you on the "talk" page over there, if you got a moment. I'm planning to put a lot of work into that page in the coming weeks, and want to make sure I'm on the right track first! -Pete 02:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions

I'm new to Wikipedia, so I haven't figured quite everything out yet, but your suggestions help and I will put them in to use.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Scoreboard (talk • contribs) 04:18, February 7, 2007

Peter French

Interesting indeed. Shot dead, killed instantly, sounds pretty rough-n-tumble to me. The article was no problem, as I have been on a round barn kick lately. (Maybe I always was). Maybe just a barn kick would be a better description.: )A mcmurray 14:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

You deleted my link

Portlandneighborhood.com is a realtor site that has alot of interesting things about some of the portland neighborhoods. They are linked to lots of pages- for example alameda, irvington, etc etc. They are a realtor website. Why are they on it? I have written a neighborhood guide that has taken months and months to do- with all my research on my website about the areas of portland- links, photos, maps etc. It is much more all inclusive than www.Portlandneighborhood.com I tried to put a link on wikipedia just like they did- two different times- and I was kicked off immediately. Why? If I am kicked off, why are they allowed to be on there lots and lots of times all over the portland neighborhoods? I think that if we both have good contributing information about the neighborhoods of portland with links- we should be treated the same. If they can be on there, we should be on there. Does that sound fair? My website is www.TheCreativeRealtor.com and I link each neighborhood directly to the neighborhood page. Another good neighborhood guide is MovingtoPortland.net. She has an awesome neighborhood guide too.

Anyway- please let me know why the rules are different. Thanks Helen HOyt helen.hoyt@comcast.net —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Helenhoyt (talk • contribs) 05:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Did you read this part of the message I put on your page? "Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product." Your photo is prominently displayed on the top of the page, which seems to be pretty blatantly advertising your product or service. Now, besides that, "His link is there, so mine should be too" is not a valid argument for including your link. "They" didn't necessarily add the link to the articles--often it was an ordinary Wikipedia user. And in fact there is some debate currently happening about whether these links are appropriate at all. Katr67 07:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Also please read WP:COI. You should not be part of any discussion on your own link because you have a conflict of interest. You should not have added it and the arguments on the merits of the site only kicks in if a third party proposes your link and we then discuss it objectively. Cheers --BozMo talk 07:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

PortlandNeighborhood.com is not a realtor owned website. The focus of the website is the urban communities (neighborhoods) in Portland. 24.22.1.168 00:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)Angela Juon, Owner, PortlandNeighborhood.com

This conversation is going on at two places at once. I think these comments should be moved to the Talk:Portland, Oregon page. Couple brief points though: BozMo, please remember that WP:COI is a guideline, not a policy. I think an owner posting their reasoning is a legitimate contribution to the discussion, provided that they recognize their conflict of interest. Angela has been very upfront in disclosing her COI, which is an excellent first step, and should be commended. However, as nobody without a COI has emerged to defend its inclusion, I think the time has come for Angela to drop her campaign. -Pete 00:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Imbrie Farm correction to more recent history

Hi, are you anonymous editor whose name change I reverted? If there is no edit summary, no cited source, and due to a lot of subtle vandalism by anon editors, we can't assume a change like yours was accurate. I'll direct the editor who wrote the bulk of that article to this post, but just so you know, posts like this can never "go away", even if I delete it, it will become part of the page history. When in doubt you can sign up for an account and use the "E-mail this user" feature. Thanks for letting us know. I suppose because of the circumstances you don't have any sources you can cite? Because one of the Wikpedia principles is citation of reliable sources. Not to imply that you're not reliable, but that's the guideline. Thanks! Katr67 18:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Katr, sent Jim an email regarding his request. Aboutmovies 07:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm deleting his post. Katr67 15:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Your message

Hey. Got your message. If it's something you can talk about here. Please do. - Donteatyellowsnow

I'd rather not, but I'll be in touch. Katr67 19:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It's a nasty dogpile. BTW, check out what they are trying to do now. Unbelievable. WP:ANI - Donteatyellowsnow 23:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

FYI, that's not exactly what I wanted to talk to you about, but I'm putting the matter on hold for now. Katr67 22:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Bull Mountain annexation nonsense

It clearly fails to qualify for Wikipedia, plus it's misleading by omission; thanks for chucking it. 24.22.3.249 00:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Umm...I don't think I deserve any thanks. I don't think the addition was completely worthless. FYI, I wasn't supporting any particular point of view, as you can see from the article's talk page, all my concerns were directly related to Wikipedia policy. I'm an equal opportunity deletionist. Thanks. Katr67 01:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Chime-in request

Would you mind having a look at the verging-on-lengthy conversation I've had with user:Cnewmark beginning at Talk:Craigslist#proper_etiquette and continuing to the next section, Talk:Craigslist#Article errors. (BTW, I have no reason to doubt he is Craig Newmark.)

Somehow I'm failing to communicate what he needs to be done to add a few facts he has for inclusion in the Craigslist article. I thought I was clear, but what should be swift progress is not happening somehow. Is it me? Am I over the top? Thanks in advance for any help! —EncMstr 18:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I just worked too long past my break to reply to the situation on the FOBM talkpage, but if I can squeeze in a few minutes I'll see what I can do. I don't know if I can contribute, but speaking for myself, I know a sanity check is always welcome. :) Katr67 18:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Boy oh boy. I think you did just fine. So it looks like Lumarine missed the point and CM is agreeing with him/her. *sigh* I guess all you can do is repeat the fact that Wikipedia can't be a source for itself. Q: "How do I solve this?" A: "Find some outside sources". Maybe suggest he tell his tale to the press, and after the facts are published, then they can be put in the article. But surely he has mentioned the disputed facts somewhere and he can provide sources? Surely he has talked about developing the list to dozens of people? If you want me to do it, so there are more voices in the debate, let me know. Check out the talk page for Dave Carter for an interesting example of this kind of debate. Jimbo actually did get involved in that one. They really couldn't use Tracy Grammer's word either. BTW, there's a process around here somewhere to get it verified that he is who he says he is. Katr67 19:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the check. That makes me feel a lot better. Jimbo apparently is watching this a little too—at least he reverted the article once or twice. I posted at Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance) for help before, but no takers. (Maybe that was the wrong place?)

I think it would go a long way if someone highly credible—like you are—told him what the standards are. He must think I'm a huffing and puffing squeaky wheel or something. I don't think it matters whether he's Craig or not—if he's not, he can edit the article without WP:COI. Being treated as if it were him just makes the situation more controlled and less loosy goosy. —EncMstr 22:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I've found getting help at the pump totally hit or miss. When DocTropics was watching the pages he was very helpful. At other times I've not heard a peep except that time one user thought my warning to another user was a bit rude. That was the whole Elk Cove thing and I don't really want to go there. :) Am I highly credible? I'm pretty good with the commas and stuff, not so great with the policy, but I can try. Katr67 22:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Donteatyellowsnow

Thanks for the message Katr. Yes, actually I was referring to you. Besides the other similarities, DEYS already assumed your familiarity with the issues, saying "they" and "it". So I see that he must have misinterpreted your original contact, as I misinterpreted his. I'm sorry about that. It was a mistake on my part.

As for my message to AM, it was really only incidental, even had it occured. And of course it had nothing to do with your behaviour at all. Sorry again. --JGGardiner 22:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, you too. Although I can see from your talk page that it isn't all happy. =) --JGGardiner 22:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

you deleted my link in 'rafting'

I added an external link a couple weeks ago to the rafting topic, linking to my website, www.whitewatercampsites.com. You deleted that link yesterday, calling it spam. Since I added it, a steady stream of people have used that link. My usage data shows that visitors spend almost 600 seconds at my site, on average. And this month they return 1.69 times each to spend another 600 seconds. It is not simply a picture gallery, it is a unique resource on the web for white water rafting enthusiasts. Yes, it has Adsense and today I made 12 cents, no joke. In the course of a year, my advertising MIGHT pay my hosting costs. I returned yesterday to expand the link text. I suppose that is promoting the site, in someone's definition. But reading the external links qualification for Wikipedia, my site certainly falls in the "should be included" category. My site is a labor of love, and very appreciated by the river rafting community, but apparently not by you. I can only ask that you do a little research and reconsider.

Certainly if someone is looking for river rafting information, they want to find my site. Commerical rafting companies won't link to it; they want to keep their visitors. There are very few places on the web that make sense to link to my site. This is, IMO, certainly one.

However, if I make my case with you and the next editor that comes along is going to delete it again, then don't bother reinstating it. Will Hansen —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mcguy0 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

According to your user contributions I only see the link you added to Selway River, which another editor also deleted as linkspam. You must mean this IP: User:67.50.221.226. Please read {{Spam}}. Editors are discouraged from adding links to sites that they own. Though Wikipedia is not here to help you get hits on your website, I can see that your link isn't particularly commercial and that it is a "unique resource". What usually happens is that someone starts spamming Oregon river articles with very commercial rafting links and I quickly discover they have also spammed Rafting, Whitewater, etc. Then I go clean out those external link sections. Those kind of articles are magnets for all sorts of competing outfitters, guides, etc. Hopefully you can see my concern because the external links sections soon become unwieldy with so many links. I'm sorry I did not look at your link more closely--sometimes it's really hard to draw the line about which links "should" be included. The problem with links like yours is that people see it and say: "His link is there, so mine should be too." That said, my area of expertise is not rafting and I don't keep an eye on that article. I think it would be best for you to discuss your link on the Rafting talkpage, where the rafting experts can chime in, bearing in mind there is a conflict of interest in defending the inclusion of a link to your own website. But if there is consensus on the Rafting talk page, and the link gets added back, then it will be harder for the "next editor that comes along" to delete it again. I hope this helps! Katr67 03:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. I'll take a look at the talk page for rafting and see where things go from there. I didn't intend to become and 'editor' and have said conflict of interest. Is there a way to delete me? I just want to repost my link (at some point) and continue using this wiki as a plain user.

Mt. Bailey in So. Oregon

Katr67,

If I recall correctly, you have a copy of the Oregon Geographic Names book? If so, could you look and see who Mt. Bailey is named after? I'm wondering if it might be William J. Bailey. Thanks. Aboutmovies 22:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Will do. I seem to be in semi-permanent posession of Twisted86's copy of OGN. I'll do it after I get back from fencing tonight and after I take care of the matter EncMstr wanted me to look into. Cheers! Katr67 23:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks I figured I could count on you, and thought you might like some less controversial talk. On a side note I hope you are not fencing the OGN, the project needs that book. :) Aboutmovies 00:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

The book doesn't have opposable thumbs--fencing it would not be a challenge and indeed it would end up full of holes. :P And I'm too tired to do anything intelligent about EncMstr's request, but I can tell you Mt. Bailey wasn't named after anybody in particular at first, might even have been a typo. In 1992 the Oregon Geographic Names Board (there's another redlink for us) voted to name the peak in honor of Vernon and Florence Bailey; Vernon was a prominent naturalist and Florence an educator and ornithologist. Everything else named Bailey in the state was named for local settlers. So there ya have it. Katr67 05:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Interesting though. Aboutmovies 01:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Warm Springs Reservation / Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs

Katr67, Do you think there should be two separate pages one for the reservation (ie: more about the land itself) and another for the folks who live there? I noticed that the Umatilla tribe and the Umatilla reservation is set up like that? Just curious, because I put some stuff on the reservation page that is really more about the tribe. --Smartone100 23:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there is a general consensus that the reservations and the tribes who live on them should have separate articles. It's a little confusing since many of the modern Oregon tribal entities (consisting of several individual tribes) have "reservation" in their names. But the people are of the reservation, they are not the reservation itself. There is often some overlap between articles, but effort should be made to differentiate the information as much as possible. When the tribal article gets written, we can move your information there. Unfortunately there is still a lot to do in the area of differentiating the articles. It's been on my to-do list forever. Just to add to the confusion, the Warm Springs (people) is a whole other article that needs to be written. If you are interested, you can see which articles already exist and which are needed at List of Indian reservations in Oregon and List of Native American Tribal Entities in Oregon. Also the category Category:Native American tribes in Oregon. Thanks for all your hard work on the tribal fishing info! Katr67 00:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for that very warm greetings! Regarding Oregon I'm just an interested reader right now, but I enjoy fixing grammar and loose ends. Flagman7 16:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Ships & More

Yes, the Iredale should go into the cat. I didn't work all the way through the History in Oregon cat as I had to write the Tonquin article. Which was slowed down by our northern neighbor also then editing the article. We'll see if he behaves. Good morning and happy rain! Aboutmovies 16:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of cats, while I was in the History of Oregon cat I came accross Living Enrichment Center. I don't think it should be in there and thought I'd see if you thought it did? Of course I am biased towards older history, but I had never heard of these people. And since there were no deaths like with Jim Jones, Heavan's Gate, etc. I'm not sure they are significant. Aboutmovies 18:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, just checking, since the Iredale wasn't originally an "Oregon ship", though of course she has spent many many more years in Oregon than anyplace else. I've seen several references to the LEC, I think it comes up in the Wilsonville article, the Dammasch article and the Pacific Northwest article. I suspect a bit of {{advert}}izing. But I haven't been in the mood to untangle that particular mess. I doubt it should be in that cat. I mean, when it comes right down to it, anything and everything that happens in Oregon is history, right? Why should that particular article be in there an not the 7,000 or so others relating to Oregon? I'll take a quick peek, and leave a note on the talk page. I managed to miss the downpour--hoping for a nice dry ride out to Minto-Brown but that's probably wishful thinking... Katr67 20:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit request

Hey, How's it goin'? First off thanks everytime you do something on my peer review requests and what not. Anyway I am in the process of improving two articles in hopes of getting GA status (I have tried to rant about it incessantly wherever possible). One, I think you did some work on, Joseph F. Glidden House, which is currently undergoing two peer reviews. The other is one that had a peer review awhile ago but I just got around to improving, this one University of Illinois Astronomical Observatory is a bit long but it's already a "B" class and I have reworked some stuff today and it's a lot better, I think it still needs a bit of work though and I was wondering, if you have the time, could you give it a copy edit and going over for any glaring contradictions or errors? Thank you ahead of time. : )A mcmurray 21:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I think I still owe you a copyedit on Executive Order 9835, but I have the day off tomorrow and had plans to do some intense wiki-ing. BTW, I may let myself get dragged kicking and screaming into seeing about getting the Oregon article up to GA/FA status, would you be willing to lend your expertise to that? Your interest in our fine state confers honorary Oregonian status on you, I think. :) Katr67 22:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh most certainly. I would be more than happy to help. Just let me know if there is anything you need me to do. I'll take a look at the Oregon article tomorrow (the main Oregon article, right?). And I am contemplating a move to Oregon, the honorary status is flattering. Thank you. As for now, I must sleep. Good night.A mcmurray 04:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, the main Oregon article. As long as you're not from California, we'll all get along great. ;) Katr67 05:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Now that made me laugh. I'm from the Middle Coast. Hee. Lake Michigan is like a small Illinois ocean, anyway. ; ) A mcmurray 12:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oregon people

Although I work on lots of categories, I think all types of people categories are the worst. I never know whether both categories or subcategories should include the same articles. It is just a mess; rarely does the category state what is expected; so anything goes. Then people get upset. Then things get worse. I have no insight. Sorry. Hmains 04:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

VoA's RC script warnings.

Hello! I saw you commented after my comment on Voice of All's talk page and I've yet to recieve any reply from him but I found this and I added the section under "For a collection of user warning templates, add:..." and this has changed my tabs to the new warnings and also given me the option to select the type of warning (blanking, vandalism etc) and an easy way to input the name of the page targeted. Just a suggestion for you if you hadn't found an alternative solution. Regards, --Farosdaughter 16:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

UO & Bach Festival

Regarding your comment about the University of Oregon trivia about the Oregon Bach festival - the festival was originally an outgrowth of the UO school of music. See [6]. But, that association isn't apparent the UO page, so the trivia seems irrelevant. The UO page is kind of a beast, isn't it. ;-) --tess 22:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)tess 22:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I looked at the Bach Festival article but didn't see the connection. Yes, the UO page strikes fear into the heart of a wikignome like me. I prefer taking on projects that don't involve such a time committment! Oh well, I'm sure it will get cleaned up eventually... Katr67 22:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Big Brother is watching you!

Hi sis,

I've finally gotten around to creating an account and plunging into the editing game. Nothing major, mainly just some gnomish cleanup on some random pages so far. Talk at ya later. Finngall 18:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Help please

Hello. I am at a loss. I am trying to defend the Wiki against a spammer who wants to insert non notable information into the DeKalb, Illinois article, I attempted to get help at AIV, they were none. It seems the system is tilted heavily in favor of this person. The user is User:JazzButcher I don't know what to do to get this person to stop. Can you help me?A mcmurray 02:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind. I figured out where to report it at.A mcmurray 03:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

FYI: I have created tools to simply your Where I have been section of your user page

I see you have a list of nations and/or states/provinces on your user page. I would like to offer you some templates for this task I created for my own list. One pair of templates will create entries identical to the one I use. (I suggest you copy my legend if you use them.) Other templates will provide just a flag or name (nation or province/state).

Will (Talk - contribs) 07:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Mount Hood incident bullets

Hi Katr67! As a perfesshunal ed it torr (I laughed for three days after you wrote something like that), I wonder what you think of the removed bullets from Mount Hood#Incident history. I'm mixed, but also a bit biased having written most of it. The editor who removed them merged several paragraphs in the last two incidents to make it hang together correctly. Now those megaparagraphs seem a bit intense. Should they be bulleted? Or is the way it is now more correct (but maybe stripped down a bit more)? —EncMstr 08:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Heh. Hmm. I'm torn. Without the bullets, the single-sentence paragraphs look choppy, yet since this is an encyclopedia, it's preferable that things be written like prose and not a list. And it's alarming that the Oregon Episcopal School incident only merits one sentence (potential bias--I know someone who was touched by this, and I know it was a huge news story at the time), while the recent incident with the folks and their dog gets a huge paragraph. This is perhaps one of the problems with an encyclopedia "anyone can edit"! Speaking of the thing with the dog, most of the other incidents listed ended in fatalities, which unfortunately makes them notable. I'm sure before the advent of an instantly updateable encyclopedia, there have been dozens if not hundreds of people who have gotten lost in the mountain, but haven't died. Do they merit mention? Anyway, back to the point, I like the list format with the bullets, but I think that's probably not how it should look--would it make sense to split off the incidents into a separate article? If you called it List of climbing incidents on Mount Hood, then you could bullet it to your heart's content. Katr67 16:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The national press thought the last incident notable: there were five or six ENG vans parked (mostly in the way) for days during the busy President's Day weekend. Personally I felt they significantly overblew it, but what do I know? I don't think a death is required for an item to qualify as a notable incident though. Perhaps the January incident where a woman was injured by falling ice was air-evacuated should be included to help balance the statistics.

There is more coming on the OES incident, perhaps enough for a full article. If and when the rest of the 1980s accidents are added, the section will indeed be too weighty. Right now it seems on the edge. Thanks for chiming in.

By the way, did you see my answer here? —EncMstr 17:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, that's crazy, but in the light of the recent fatal incident, and the on-going debate about who should pay to rescue "idiots", I guess it makes a kind of sense. I just bet in a couple years nobody will remember anything about it except that it involved a dog. :) Yup, saw your reply, sorry. I had already linked to one of the policies, but nobody has come back to debate the issue. Still, though it seems really obvious, I still swear that somewhere it literally says that a Wikipedia article cannot be used as a reference for another article. Oh well, "they" are always changing the guidelines at meta... Katr67 18:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Oregon Volcanoes

Hi Katr67, I noticed that you've been systematically removing the "see also" sections from a number of Oregon volcano articles I created. Why? They are there to provide quick links to other nearby volcanoes. If anything, the sections need to be expanded, not deleted. I made all those articles in a single concerted push, so I haven't had time to go back and fine-tune the list for each volcano. I will do so as time permits.

Please don't delete those sections entirely, but instead correct and expand them with other nearby volcanoes (obviously the "Cascade Range" link can be deleted, since it is redundant with other parts of the article). Maybe the sections should just be renamed "Nearby volcanoes" instead, since that's their primary purpose right now. But "see also" is certainly an appropriate name, too. Thanks, Seattle Skier 02:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for all your hard work on those articles. Yes, according to Wikipedia:Guide to layout#See also, it's best not to add see alsos that are already linked in the article. As far as the others, all I could see was an arbitrary collection of other volcanoes, which seemed to me would become unwieldy if all volcanoes were included. The Category:Volcanoes of Oregon and the like serve the same purpose. I suppose if someone is new to navigating wiki categories, adding a hardlink to the category would be helpful to them, and yes, a heading "Nearby volcanoes" might work, but again it seems like it would be arbitrary (who determines what "nearby" is?). Another solution would be to add a brief explanation as suggested in the layout guide, such as *Mount Hood, next closest Cascade volcano to the south. The wording is a little clunky, but you get the idea. So if it's clear why things are in a see also section, I don't have a problem with it, but you have to think about what a user might want. Is s/he thinking "Hmm. I wonder what other volcanoes are around here?" and they don't know how to use categories, then maybe a hardlink to the category would be good. But for example, at Hoodoo Butte, I saw Mount Hood and Crater Lake... What do they have to do with Hoodoo Butte? Someone might click on Mount Hood thinking s/he would get more info on Hoodoo Butte and be confused. You say you need to fine tune the lists and that's fine, but at first glance it looked (and apparently was) completely random. (Maybe leave a  about what your plan is next time?)

BTW, I didn't remove all the see also sections because I didn't start to notice them until halfway through fixing the sort order (leaving a space after the pipe causes the article to not sort alphabetically), and I'm lazy and not a complete ogre :), but "See also" should go above "References" and "External links." I hope I explained where I was coming from clearly. Thanks for checking in. Katr67 03:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Discussion continues at Template talk:Volcanoes of Oregon

Talk:New Carissa

I noticed you added the peer review template to the New Carissa talk page; however, the peer review is already linked at the top of the page in the "Article Milestones" section of the FA template - it's just hidden by default. Not a big deal either way, just wanted to point that out. -Big Smooth 17:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh rats. I didn't see that, I tend to ignore templates. I did link the peer review to the archived version of the automated suggestions, so at least that was helpful. :-\ I wanted to make the NC review handy because we are thinking about FAing Oregon. Thanks and happy editing! Katr67 18:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

New NRHP Collaboration Division

(Message generated via copy and paste, sorry to be impersonal but I am hitting up everyone in the project. But hello. : ) Hey, saw you were a participant in the National Register of Historic Places WikiProject. I thought I would let you know that there is a new Collaboration Division up for the project. The goal of the division is to select an article or articles for improvement to Good article standard or higher. There is a simple nomination process, which you can check out on the division subpage, to make sure each candidate for collaboration has enough interested editors. This is a good way to get a lot of articles to a quality status quickly. Please consider participating. More details can be seen at the division subpage. IvoShandor 11:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I-5

I think it's "Afterbirth" by From First to Last, which was in there, haha. I didn't get it either, but with so little info on it, it doesn't need to be there. Good call. Cheers! --MPD^{T / C} 05:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Ohhhhh.... I get it. I'm out of the loop as far as Nu-metal is concerned. It sure sounded like they were describing the tracks on some album. :) Katr67 05:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Location of project banner

Re: your change to Lewis and Clark State Recreation Site. Thanks for the tip, I'm already using it on my next stub. And, BTW, your welcoming messages are very nice and appreciated. Cheers! Werewombat 15:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Christmas Valley Airport

Thanks for catching that. I wonder what I thought I was doing? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

re. Stubsensor Cleanup Project

Your opinion makes sense, I've replaced the stub tag on both Oregon's 1st congressional district and Oregon's 3rd congressional district - thanks for the input! (also copied to project page) PGWG 17:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, it was finally a good day to take pics. If the clouds stay away tomorrow I might be able to get a good outside shot of the capitol, if the big ugly yellow school buses stay away. Aboutmovies 06:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Made minor changes to Chemult, Oregon entry

I made some minor formatting changes, added a little more info on elevation/lat/long, and mentioned the post office and forest service since they are government. Feel free to get rid of it if you think I did it wrong. jimransier@hotmail.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.107.78.245 (talk) 20:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

Thanks. It's not like I own that article, though so you can usually put discussions like this on the article's talk page where other people can see them. The lat/long was actually already there in the form of the mapit links at the bottom, which places the coords in the upper right corner of the page, so I took that part out as redundant. Happy editing! Katr67 15:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

More movies made in Oregon

Hi, KATR! I saw your page of movies, realized some movies (such as "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest")were missing and set out to find you a better search phrase for IMDB. Check this one out and I think your list will get longer:

http://www.imdb.com/LocationTree?Oregon,+USA

I hope this helps. Did I ask you to check out the lovely Southern Oregon ghost towns of Golden (Douglas county) and Buncom (Jackson County) ?

Keep up the good work,

DaKine 22:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the location tree link. But actually, it's a work in progress and certainly not ready to "go live". (P.S. some people are a little touchy about other people editing their user pages, even if there are glaring typos...) I was mostly keeping track of the less-obvious ones, especially the ones filmed in and around Eugene (personal bias). You did suggest Golden, and somebody else suggested Buncom. Now that two people have suggested it, maybe I had better do it, huh? Of course, I'm mostly going to use material from the Internet, and maybe a line or two from Oregon Geographic Names so if you want to create the articles yourself with cited sources, feel free! Be BOLD. They're on my watchlist so if they get created I will see them, and I can't help but edit them after that! ;) Happy editing! Katr67 15:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

grammah

I was kicking myself for not going all-in on the stub-for-deletion debate, like "how dare you people offend Oregon's treasured and Most Excellent Grognard." Bet that woulda made you blush!

Yeah, Mom is pretty hip in her own way - now I'll get to figure out if she gets "yo' mama" humor. Dig that ND joke. -Pete 16:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Grammah indeed. IvoShandor 16:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh. BTW, I am so stealing that plainlinks thing for my WPOR userbox... Katr67 18:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

nestled

The funniest thing about that "nestled" search is that the first thing after all those cities is "Fecal sac."

tyler skarz 04:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Uh...thanks for sharing! Katr67 04:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yaquina River

Hello, Katr67. I noticed that you edited Yaquina River to fix an image that I had inserted. For some reason the image was not displaying at thumb size, but you changed it to 250px and now it displays. I have run across this problem previously, where an image will not display at all at a particular resolution, but change it, even slightly, and then it displays. I had the same problem with the image Petroglyphs in the Columbia River Gorge.jpg that I added to Columbia River Gorge. It was not displaying at 300px, so I changed it to 298px and now it shows just fine. Any idea why this happens? Have you run across this problem before? ●DanMS • Talk 04:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Dan. Images aren't really my thing, so I have no idea what is going wrong. I just saw that someone (probably you) had used the same solution with a problem image, so I tried messing with the Yaquina one and it worked. I had a suspicion that if I changed it back, the problem would resolve itself (on the age-old principle of taking something apart and putting it back together again). I just tried that on Yaquina River and it seems to have worked. Strange. Maybe ask at Wikipedia:Village Pump (technical) and see if anyone there knows what's going on. Katr67 04:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

HFMA

I see you removed the Yahoo! Top Ten part, which is fine. But I had to re-add the ref since it also covered the third largest museum part too. Odd thing. When I wrote the article it was just a top ten thing, then when the DYK person nominated the article it was #9, last night it was #14. Aboutmovies 17:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I wondered about removing the ref alltogether, but I figured that fact wasn't too disputable. I assume the Portland Art Museum and Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art are the top two? Anyway, as you can see, I found what I consider a better reference--I hope you don't mind--I just don't like that Yahoo page at all. One of the top ten is now a winery I've never heard of...advert city. I quickly tried to find a source not connected with UW that has a list of the biggest museums in the state, I bet there's one out there somewhere. Happy trails! Katr67 17:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I just noticed that all this relates to your DYK, oops. Katr67 17:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I didn't nominate it. But I looked all over and can't find any sort of museum rankings site, though I found just as good of a source as the Yahoo one for the UO museum, which is now #2! Aboutmovies 19:14, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Wetlands

That was fast. I was going back in to populate the category after finishing Jackson Bottom, but you beat me to it. Thanks. Aboutmovies 18:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. All in a day's...*ahem*...work. I loves me some categories, and was dying to put that plains thing somewhere, since it wasn't a grassland, so thank *you* for creating the cat. Now I had better go do what I get paid for... Katr67 18:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you'll be back. You will start getting the shakes and feel the need to feed your addiction. *huuumwaa aah aaaah* Aboutmovies 18:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I can quit anytime. Katr67 18:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Hey- as far as I can tell, the *mp template (could it be a weirder name??!) is a substitute for a "*", that overcomes some Firefox-specific problem where bullet lists crash into images.

As for DYK items, I misunderstood your list, but I think it would be cool to keep track of nominations, as well - and build up a list of interesting facts about Oregon. Sounds like a separate list, though.

Just heard back from the Gov, they're on it. They didn't have much clue what I meant by "license," which seems weird for a former attorney gen/scj who champions open source but…whatever, they're willing to play along. -Pete 23:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Open solicitation for input/advice

Hello! There's been some recent activity getting the ball rolling at WikiProject Journalism, and if you'd like to join us, I'm sure your input would be valued. In particular, User:Wiki Wistah has proposed a guideline for editing articles about newspapers, and although I've responded with comments of my own, WW rightly suggested that it should be more than just a two-way conversation. I've noticed some of your own edits on related matters and thought you might be interested. Any suggestions would certainly be appreciated. Otherwise, if this is not of interest to you, or if you've already got a plateful of editing, feel free to ignore this message! -Tobogganoggin ^talk 02:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

my cat removal

Thanks - it was hiding in plain sight, which is I guess why I didn't see it; I was looking in bodies of text where I knew I'd been naming various categories, but they all had the second colon in them; I guess what happened here is I copied the contents of a template, trimming them in the box, but didn't notice I'd also selected the category attached to the template......how's the weather in Oregon? It's actually warm here for the first time in months; don't know if your rain was as bad as ours, but ours was epic (60-year records all over the place, with predictions of a 100-year flood on the Fraser in the next month or two......); gonna go outside and play ;-). Thanks for finding that again; I keep on coming up with bits of Oregon history in BC sources I've got, y'know, I just don't have time to add them; mostly fur trade stuff but also cross-border stuff to do with the Similkameen, Boundary and Kootenay areas and washington in the Oregon Country days; it's always intriguing to me what I find about BC-side history in American histories and about American-side history in BC accounts; there's tons of material affecting various existin articles and suggesting others; I just don't ahve time, but Oregon/WA/ID/MT even UT/WY historians/writers/wikipedians should be aware that they may find things in BC history about their own areas that they haven't heard before, or told from a different perspective. This also includes more recent events like the Salmon War of 1996, although that didn't affect Oregon it's certainly as much an Alaska or WA story as it is a BC one; ditto the mining history of eastern WA, ID and MT with BC's Southern Interior districts/valleys, whose histories are often more involved with Spokane's etc (and even Denver) than they are with New West/Vancouver/Victoria. Oregon's a bit more removed but there's still threads that go back and forth; the reason I'm rambling about this is if there's any particular historical topic area that's of interest to you, I'll keep my eyes open for bits and send 'em along if found.Skookum1 00:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Tsunami hazard zone

Hi Katr67. I am too lazy to add the tsunami hazard sticker anywhere else. In my view it makes sense to have such a warning on pages about coastal touristic resorts at risk. Feel free to revert my addition if you don't think it is useful.--Unconcerned 20:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Airport Geolinks

Good day, recently you added Geolinks to the Alkali Lake State Airport article. I'm not sure if you know this but if you click on the coords in the airport info box it brings up tons of links to maps & such. In fact I believe all of the geolinks added are covered there. Let me know what you think as it may be redundant to add geolinks to the bottom of airport articles. Thanks! -Trashbag 01:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I kinda prefer the geolinks because it saves a step, what with the map links right on the article page. It's probably redundant, but for that one article, I wanted to make it abundantly clear that the airport is in the middle of nowhere. ;) Feel free to take it out if you want, I promise I won't plague the rest of the airport articles with it. BTW, I think the closest actual town is Wagontire, Oregon. Katr67 02:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

OSU Radiation Center Tags

Hey! I removed the quality tag you placed on OSU Radiation Center because I think it was there due to the spelling errors, and it's evolved quite a bit since then. If you could look at the article again and comment with what parts are difficult to understand or make no sense it would be greatly appreciated. I want to get all of the parts that need attention addressed b/c I just despise articles that have tags that never go away. Thanks! theanphibian 06:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It looks much better, thanks. If you don't mind I'll just go ahead and take care of the {{context}} issues, which apply especially to the lead paragraph, which should state clearly what and where the thing is. I think perhaps the article should be moved as well, as I saw suggested somewhere, and there might be some more things that could be wikified. If I see anything else that's unclear, I'll be sure to let you know. Thanks to you too. Katr67 23:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Oregon related articles

I have completed some list of descendants of Category:Oregon than are not marked as Project Oregon. The list is not complete, as the bot crashed, but the list User:AlexNewArtBot/OregonList should keep you busy for a while Alex Bakharev 14:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! Katr67 15:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Can I delete (or perhaps strike out) the ones that we've looked at? If you finish the list will you start it on a new page? I don't want to mess up your system or duplicate our efforts. Katr67 15:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I went through 1850 and added WPOR tags to those I thought should be in our web. I left out those that had little or nothing to do with the state. For instance if they only played college sports, went to college, or played briefly professionally in Oregon I left them out. Happy bunny day. Aboutmovies 21:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for helping out. I have little interest in athletes but somebody likes them so I have been tagging them. I don't care one way or the other so I see no need to make that consistent. Somebody else can do it if s/he wants. I also tagged some satanist author who used to live in Portland. <shrug>. I'm going to leave out things like "Milk" though because though it's Oregon's official state beverage (gotta love the milk lobby) our connection to the article ends there. I don't know if you're checking out the categories some of these things are in, but I found a few that were flying under our radar: "Television shows based in Oregon", "Bus stations in Oregon"...useful? I dunno but I tagged 'em. So what happened to it being a sunny bunny day? Katr67 21:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Some weren't atheletes, they just went to college here and never came back. Didn't see any interesting cats, but wasn't looking that closely either. As to the sun, well I think we didn't sacrifice enough bunnies to the satanic author. Well, maybe next year. Aboutmovies 21:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Christianity/Oregon overlap assessment

Hi, saw your message on my talkpage about assessing the Project: Oregon articles that are also within the scope of the Christianity project. Basically, I was just being bold, and have overlapped my assessment on a handful of articles. If that's a problem, I'll be glad to stop. Just trying to be a friendly neighbor. Did you disagree with my assessment, or is it mainly just inappropriate for me to be assessing articles for projects I'm not a part of? Just let me know. No offense taken on my part. Nswinton 18:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

RE on my talk page. Have a great day! Nswinton 18:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Sometimes a Great Notion (novel)

I noticed you added a "sic" following the title Never Give A Inch in this article. I dont think it is really appropriate in a title. Of course inline inside of a quote this would be normal practice, but following a title, not a quote, I dont think it is appropriate and it looks odd and out of place. Russeasby 16:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Power

Could you take a look at Katherine Ann Power and copy edit it to make sure things make sense and items are linked, etc. Thanks. Aboutmovies 21:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Katherine Ann Power

Thank you for improving the article Katherine Ann Power. But I'd just like to inquire that when and where was she born, and if she is still alive? Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 05:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually User:Aboutmovies did most of the work improving the article. I'm not sure any of the available sources say what her exact place or date of birth was. The article states that she grew up in Denver, so I'd assume she was born there, and by doing the math, it looks like she was born in 1949 or 1950. As far as I know, she's still alive. Katr67 05:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I found an image of her wanted poster on eBay. Yes, she was born in Denver, and she was born in 1949. Though I'm not sure we can use the image of the poster as a source to cite in the article, I saved a copy of the image, just in case. That info is probably available somewhere, however. Katr67 13:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for searching. Heh, the FBI looked for her for decades trying to hunt her down, just for an act she did that many people find to be heroic. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, indeed! Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 03:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at Chinook Salmon

Thanks for lookin at Chinook Salmon and reverting the garbage edit about fry and bathtubs. I thought I'd gotten that one too, but obviously had missed it. -Fenevad 13:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Salmon have a tough enough time as it is without people vandalizing their article too. :) Katr67 14:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Oregon State Library Entry is Looking Good

Just wanted to say thanks for all the improvements you have made to the page. And to point out one quibble. The photo of the "card catalog" is not really our card catalog in the sense of being our book catalog. Like most libraries we have an online book catalog and have had one for a long time. The card file at the State Library is what we call the Oregon Index. It is a manual card index to local newspapers that we began in the early 20th century. It also indexes other historical resources. We quit indexing in the 70's, so the scope is limited, but it is still a very valuable resource for researchers. -- Jim Scheppke —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jscheppke (talk • contribs) 04:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

Trask Mountain

Hey could you take a look with the good book? Aboutmovies 20:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Strangely enough, there's no mention of the mountain, just the river, which is named after Elbridge Trask as it states in that article. I'd assume the mountain is named after the river but OGN won't help us this time. I did fiddle with your flora... Katr67 21:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Companies

Thanks for the heads up on OSI, they were not on my watchlist. That same person also tagged Shari's. If all the articles in the Based in Oregon cat that don't show notability were tagged, then it would take a couple days to add the needed info as rarely are there any sources. I'm all for people starting articles, but take a minute to add a source. Enough ranting. No maybe I can work on what I planned on working on today. Aboutmovies 22:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Ditto on the rant. I was talking to my brother about this the other day. His hobby is speedying seemingly non-notable new articles. And he gets a lot of "Wah. You deleted my article!" And I was saying gosh, ya know, how hard is it? I mean, I've written a few dozen articles on barely notable localites, and not one has been deleted because I properly format them, categorize them and source them as fully as possible. Katr67 22:54, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

KY/Bluegrass

I saw that a little bit ago and thought "how many people outside of KY are going to recognize the outline of the state?" I thought about commenting, something along the lines of "maybe something more recognizable outside of the state, like a bust of Tubby Smith, oh wait he left..." But I thought that might be considered rude. Aboutmovies 17:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Roffle. Katr67 17:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Another dubious milestone...

A vandal created an attack page in my honor. The guy couldn't even get my name right. Sigh. :-/ --Finngall ^talk 23:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! Katr67 23:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thomas J. Hubbard

Can you check the OGN and see if Hubbard, Oregon is named for this Hubbard? Thanks. Aboutmovies 01:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, ask me just when I was about to go out into the big blue room...Just a sec, I'll see what I can find out. Katr67 01:06, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Nope it was named for one Charles Hubbard, who took over a donation land claim from a guy named Hunt who disappeared after he joined the California Gold Rush... None of the other things named Hubbard match Thomas either. Cheers. Katr67 01:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks for checking. What's the big blue room? Aboutmovies 01:15, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

You know, outside. :) Though maybe right now it's the big gray room... Katr67 01:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

who made you the wikipolice?

What is so wrong with me posting a link to a Portland area news service? I noticed PortlandWiki is there, why is that okay?

Maybe I should leave you a message like you did to me that says "please don't delete my contribution to wiki pages."

Actions like your undermine the entire wiki philosophy. My contribution is entirely within the scope of the page and adds to users experience. What is your problem with it?

Get a life...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.117.164.28 (talk • contribs) 01:21, April 26, 2007

WTF?

Why are you threatening to block me just because I do practical jokes? You should tell me that 'NO JOKES ARE ACCEPTED ON WIKIPEDIA BECAUSE WE SUCK AT THEM' on my user talk.

♫Death gle an er 01:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

U an admin?

Wow - if you consider meaningless typoing of Wikilinks and removal of references sections "practical jokes," then not only are you vandalizing, you need to work on your sense of humor, too. Adminship has nothing to do with enforcing policy - not at this level, anyway. You're vandalizing. Stop it. -Pete 01:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Deathgleaner. Katr does not need to tell you, you should read the OFFICIAL POLICY titled Wikipedia:Vandalism, where very near the top so it is hard not to miss:

The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities to pages, page blanking, or the insertion of bad (or good) jokes or other nonsense.

So please read, and comprehend. Then stop vandalising and you will not have any problems. You may also want to read WP:WWIN as well so you can figure out what not to do in general. Aboutmovies 04:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

dante's

You are not the wikipolice and your behavior is beginning to border upon that of a self-appointed dilettante.

I was going to refrain from commenting to you, but your over-editing of the page forces my hand. Frank first informed me of your harassment months ago. The hoax tag can stay. The "media" articles did need to go. However, deleting the accolades section when there are legitimate links to AOL went too far. This is not spam. It is proof of an award. Any search of the Willamette Week archives will confirm our awards in the previous years. Or, you could just get up from behind your computer, come down to the bar and see the awards for yourself.

You might also want to take a little trip down to the Oregon Historical Society to confirm my research on the building, that way we can remove the original research tag.

That being said, if you continue to make condescending comments in the talk section, remove valid information, or otherwise engage in behavior that is contrary to wikipedia's policies, I will report you.

Focus your efforts on other Oregon-related topics, since you are the self-appointed "expert" in these matters. I'm sure there are bigger fish to fry.

Good day. I consider the matter closed and am happy with the entry as it now stands.

PP —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pspark (talk • contribs) 03:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC).

Hi Paul~

Wow. Frank must be pretty thin-skinned if he considers these edits: here, here, and here, and here (the sum total of my interaction with him), besides this cryptic entry on my talk page and subsequent conversation: on my and his talk page as "harassment".

It happens that I *am* a dilettante. Aren't you? And aren't all dilettantes self-appointed?

I felt the "accolades" section was unencyclopedic. I never said it was spam, and I never said they weren't real awards. But a section like that does begin to make the article about your bar look like an advertisement, and wikipedia isn't here to provide free advertising space. I didn't place the original research tag, but before you provided your detailed and apparently well-researched history section, the article really was mostly nonsense, and you apparently agree since you say the {{hoax}} tag can stay.

Can you please point out which wikipedia policies I have violated? And I'm confused--I never made *any* comments in the talk section. You must mean the edit summaries? Feel free to mention my actions at the administrator's noticeboard. Or else check out these other ways to work out article disputes: request for comment, mediation, or arbitration.

You seem pretty condescending yourself. I never said I was an "expert" about anything. I think this can be worked out. Usually these things are done on the article's talk page. In the meantime, you really need to read about ownership of articles (it doesn't really matter if *you* are pleased with how the article is now, because it's not *your* article--like I told Frank, you need to be prepared to have your work mercilessly edited), what wikipedia is not (including an advertising medium for your club) and conflict of interest. Another thing we like around here is civility. Try it :) Some people prefer the essay entitled Don't Be a Dick. Katr67 05:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Civility is definitely the main problem here. I think you both need to focus on the quality of the article, and Wikipedia policies and guidelines, rather than each other's approach to the matter. And by the way, threats of administrative action are pretty weak. If you want to involve an administrator, PP, by all means, just do it...it will likely help improve the quality of the article, to everyone's benefit. But the threats just raise the tension, without serving any productive purpose. -Pete 21:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

re: non-obvious vandal

Hi, I respect your assessment that my recent nomination for blocking may have been in error, and agree that this user's behavior is different from most vandals. But I feel it's essential that something be done. Can you suggest an alternative? I don't want to violate WP:CANVASS, and I'm not sure what remedies are available between that and a block. -Pete 19:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I did a little digging about Interstate 2, and it looks like it might exist. Or at least some major road(s) named #2 exist. See Talk:Interstate 2. If he's acting in good faith, then I'm not going to block him. He did have a string of vandalism on the 27th, but if he's stopped vandalizing there's no need to block him now. Has he vandalized since his last warning (not counting Interstate 2)? --Fang Aili ^talk 19:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I see Pete beat me here. Thanks for being a good Wikipedian and assuming good faith about Deathgleaner--I'm afraid I'm a bit more cynical about his I-2 article. He's done some almost-but-not quite vandalism, mostly useless edits and unexplained changes, which I have reverted. I know you can't block him for that, but like Pete, I'd like to know what to do short of waiting for him to get bored and go away. Katr67 19:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I just gave him a "final warning". [7] Does this suffice? Please contact me if you need a block performed. --Fang Aili ^talk 20:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Not a female body part

I award this Barnstar to Katr67 for their great efforts improving WP Oregon. Over 2000 edits again this month, and every single one of them in Oregon ;) Aboutmovies 23:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey- I wanted to second your Barnstar award...but (as usual) you beat me to the punch :) Congrats, well-deserved and long overdue and all that. Keep up the kickass gnomerific Oregon improvmentism! -Pete 17:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Nez Perce

The accent markj and associated pronounciation are inaccurate with respect to the Nez Perce. As a teacher of Pacific Northwest history, I grow weary of this common error. At least let Wikipedia get it right.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.74.220 (talk • contribs) 20:29, February 27, 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia! I suggest you sign up for an account, we can always use more well-informed editors. Unfortunately when an anonymous editor removes content from an article, does not provide sources or discuss the changes on the talk page, or use an edit summary, it's hard for us to tell whether or not the change is vandalism or personal opinion. The use of accents may be wrong, but rather than completely remove the information from the article, it might be best to include it and explain why it is wrong, citing your sources of course, because it is still pretty common to see the accent used. Without a solid explanation in the article, the information may just get added back again by someone else. I hope that helps. Katr67 20:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I created an account right after posting the message to you. Now, can you explain why I get messages intended for Oriel College?

Mission Mill

I think you mentioned that you used to give tours at the museum. If so, do you think the history they are giving is particularly accurate? I ask because their webiste says the Indian School became the Oregon Institute, then Willamette U. I know OI became WU, but according to G. Hines this is not what happened. And from what I've seen elsewhere I think Hines is correct, plus since Hines was there I give his opinion a bit more weight. Aboutmovies 20:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I haven't started volunteering yet (I'm a slacker), but I have a big packet of information from them.(still wondering if I can cite it as a source, I need to ask) There are definitely some inaccuracies I saw, some minor and silly, but it could be MM isn't right. The way I know the story, the Indian School was kind of a bust, due to lack of Indians and the pressing need to worry more about basic survival. However, there was definitely a need to educate the children of the missionaries and others who showed up, so the Indian School sort of morphed into the Oregon Institute because there were teachers around and people who needed teaching, but I don't know if there was direct lineage. I'll have to check the packet when I get home. The website mentions the lineage in two places, but only one establishes a direct connection between the two. (Egads that site is hard to navigate...) Katr67 21:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Very confusing. I re-looked at the Hines stuff and it isn't clear either. Then the End of the Trail people have on their site it was two different locations. Guess I'll have to check out some books. Thanks. Aboutmovies 21:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Isn't Chemawa mixed up in there as well? Katr67 21:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I think Chemawa is the problem. People are confusing the two and think J. Lee's Indian Manual Training School is the precursor to Chemawa. That's rare, white folk lumping the natives together. Aboutmovies 23:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ghost Towns

I noticed "Ghost Towns" as a project on your other page. There is one in southern Oregon, called Buncom. You can find a little on the web. Anyhow, I'm fairly lame at making Wikipedia catergories - I barely know how to post images right. But if you ever feel like adding Buncom under Oregon, I'd be glad to send you a photo to use in it. Its just 3 buildings. I think I have one or two images now, but its only a few miles down the road, if I can't locate one and need to take another.Mdvaden 05:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. Somewhere in the chaos on my desk I've got a list of ghost town articles I want to get around to writing and I'm sure Buncom is on it. Judging by the pictures on the 'net, it looks a little like Jawbone Flats up at Opal Creek Wilderness Area. I seem to get easily distracted around here, but when I write the article I'll be sure to drop you a note. P.S. Sorry I meant to touch base with you about your Bigfoot trap image before it got deleted, but it indeed looks like you got the copyright tag correct this time. Thanks for uploading it--it really adds to the article. Talk to you later, Katr67 06:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Tricia Leines

Hi! I remember ages ago you querying my adding Patricia Leines as a notable resident of Medford as she did not have a page (see User talk:PageantUpdater/Archive 4#Patricia Leines if you wish to refresh your memory). Anyway I just noticed that someone else created the article and when I was expanding the article I remembered our discussion so thought I'd pop you a note :) -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 09:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Glencoe High School

Hey there, I notice you had done a little bit of editing on the Glencoe High School page. I cleaned it up a little bit, please let me know what you think of my edits and what you think needs to be done. I went to Glencoe, so I'd like to see its page improve. Pablothegreat85 21:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Champoeg cat

Since I know a lot of the folks I changed today are on your watchlist, I mainly left those that were important outside of the participation at the meetings in the main cat. But if their main notablity was just from the meetings, then I put them only in the sub cat. Let me know if you think this makes sense. Aboutmovies 20:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:MOS

As I see you keep changing around the sections with a reference to the MOS, I thought I would let you know section order is not covered there, it is in Wikipedia:Guide to layout. And it says the order doesn't matter which is why I normally put the ref section last. It is a personal preference I have since I always put footnotes at the bottom since most people don't bother to check them (even my professors joke with us that nobody reads them), and I think people are more likely to use the external links. But that's my preference, I'm not trying to get you to agree but somepeople (as I think you have expierenced) might not like others changing articles for no reason. Aboutmovies 20:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, technically the GTL is part of the MOS so I'm not wrong about that part. It says it's "okay to change the sequence" of the sections, which I take to mean the order they have listed is the preferred way. I bet there's a huge talkpage argument about this archived somewhere. I dunno, most of the articles I see have the external links at the bottom, which seems like a consensus, and I really think it looks better that way and that people are used to looking at the bottom of the page for the external links so it's faster for them to find them that way. This is the kind of thing professional editors get paid to make consistent. Since I can't achieve consistency across the whole of Wikipedia, I figured I'd try for it on our end. If Wikipedia were a real encyclopedia, the guideline wouldn't be so vague and I could have my way, Bwahaha. Anyway, I hope I've only changed the order when I'm also editing other things, 'cos doing stuff like that and nothing else (I'm thinking of people who do nothing but change the spacing around the == Headings == vs. ==Headings==) *is* truly annoying, though luckily so far I think I've managed to annoy only you :). I'll try to look the other way on your articles, but that's how I see it, YMMV. Katr67, Hobgoblin, 21:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Oregon Airport locations

Good day Katr67, I've noticed that you've been working on critiquing cities that have been called out in airport articles. Be advised that the cities selected as references where selected for a reason. These "cities" - whether a local or a cross road in the middle of no where - are called out in two FAA related documents. The first is FAA A/FD or Airport/Facility Directory. This directory is used by every airman for gathering information on an airport or other facility (such as a helipad).

The second is the FAA Form 5010 - Airport Master Record. When an airport is built and every three years there after it will be inspected and all pertinent information is recorded here. The inspection is performed by the FAA or a designee. (Trivia) In the State of Oregon, this is performed by State Airport Inspector with the Oregon Department of Aviation.

I would advise in keeping with standard in calling out the city addressed by the FAA. By all means feel free to indicate whether that local is incorporated, and if it is not incorporated then what the next closest city is.

Just for an example of this data here is the 5010 data for Lake State Airport. Note how Alkali Lake is called out as the associated city. I hope this help explain the method to my madness. Happy Wiking -Trashbag 02:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I find this baffling because I checked the USGS database, the Portland State University Geographic Names Database, and Oregon Geographic Names, and the places I changed are neither "populated places" nor "locales" (defined as a "battlefield, crossroad, camp, farm, ghost town, landing, railroad siding, ranch, ruins, site, station, windmill") [8] in any of those references. This is why I changed them to reflect the Wikipedia naming convention of Settlement Name, Oregon and put the nearest actual populated place. (Apparently even Wagontire has a population of 2.) These places are instead natural features and should be named simply Foobar Lake or Foobar (Oregon). I see how you'd want the List of Oregon Airports to reflect what the FAA says, so feel free to revert my changes. However, though I'd hate to say the FAA is "wrong" (have they talked to the USGS lately?), for the purposes of Wikipedia, I'd prefer these places didn't have wikilinks that made it seem as if they were settlements. (I was really doubtful about Beaver Marsh too, but that place even had its own post office for a time.) Perhaps, for example, the Alkali Lake (Oregon) article could include a sentence something like "for the purposes of the FAA, a location eight miles north of the lake, referred to as 'Alkali Lake, Oregon' is considered the nearest 'city' to Alkali Lake Airport". Similar to the blurb some of us put on Census-Designated Places--see Neskowin, Oregon. Katr67 06:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

category-mistress guidance sought

I'm working on adding divisions to the {{WikiProject Oregon}} template, but am in doubt about the proper category arrangement. As you seem to more fully embrace categories than I do, perhaps you could suggest the category names and relationships that these WP:ORE divisions should fall into:

government
education / schools
biography / people
history
sports & athletes biographies
flora
business / companies
geography / physical
culture / arts
transport / roads / airports

I expect these would be named rooted at category:WikiProject Oregon or similar names would be subcategories of it, but not sure how to proceed. For example, should government project articles be under category:WikiProject Oregon government, category:WikiProject Oregon/government, category:WPORE government, or what? Maybe this should go to the project talk page? —EncMstr 18:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Oooh fancy. Well, as for government, we've already got Category:WikiProject Oregon Government & Politics, so why don't we follow the lead of that one but maybe lowercase like your first example because history, culture etc. are not really subprojects but subdivisions? We can key them to the existing subdivisions. I'll see if there's any examples of how other WikiProjects do it. Katr67 18:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

So I tend to to see how WPMinnesota does things, as they seem to have their act together/have more obsessives than we do ;). This is how they break it down: Category:WikiProject Minnesota. I like their format Category:WikiProject Oregon/Education, etc. I'd skip the "general" subcategory that they have, and I see their "nature and geography" seemingly overlaps "places". We have a cities subproject, but that can in turn fall under our geography category. I'd take the one you call "flora" and make it natural history (there used to be an Oregon fauna category that got axed but there's still a bit of fauna relating to our project). That's the only one I can see that doesn't match up with a subproject, but that's probably OK. They have a parks category, do we need one? We do have a lot of parks. It could be a subcatgory of geography. They don't have a history subcat but we'll need one of course. Katr67 14:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'll propose something based on that at WP:ORE. Thanks. —EncMstr 23:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Take a look?

Hey there-

Just got back from the Maryhill Museum of Art (which has an awesome exhibit on Celilo Falls, btw) and I'm trying to wikify my newfound nuggets of knowledge. Could you take a look at Maryhill, Washington - I tried to make it grasp more coherently the dual roles of "modern" maryhill (pop. 98) and the original planned community. It's a weird combo, and one I know you've dealt with before…mind letting me know what you think? I've also been plugging away at Samuel Hill, Celilo Falls, The Dalles Dam, etc… -Pete 09:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Cool, I need to get over there one of these days. I didn't just take a look, I was BOLD and did that thing that I do. I even happen to have a book on Washington sitting here so I threw in a little more info. See what you think--I added the blurb I stole from Bkonrad for just such purposes, slapped a bunch cats on it, etc. Judging by the info I found online, Columbia/Columbus had an identity of its own before it became Maryhill. There's a tiny bit more I can add from the book I have, but I'm sleep-deprived so I'll see if I can get to it later... Katr67 03:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Good stuff. My original conundrum, however, remains. In this particular case, it seems to me that the historical status of the place is more significant – or at least, equally significant – to its present status as a hamlet of 98 people. I think a summary of its history belongs in the "intro" paragraph. Do you disagree? -Pete 00:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

LPO

The funny thing is, that removal came from the same IP address as the one that originally added it…also without explanation. -Pete 20:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Heh. Well, s/he's stuck with it now. Bwahaha. P.S. I'll get back to you on the Maryhill thing. I had some ideas but I got sidetracked... Katr67 20:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

The line under Libertarian Party of Oregon History concerning Wes Wagner lawsuit is false and misleading: "Instead of complying and producing accurate financial documents, the party leadership spent over $6000 in attorney's fees to not disclose this financial information." It is my understanding and direct experience that the LPO Treasurer made available all books and records to Mr. Wagner and any other member of the LPO State Committee at their request. If the LPO would have answered Mr. Wagner's "Alternative Writ of Mandamus" in the venue of the Washington County Court, it would have subjected the LPO to paying his attorney's fees as if it were an admission of some sort of guilt not to mention a recognition of the courts jurisdiction in the matter which was disputed by the LPO, affirmed by Judge Hernandez and the suit summarily dismissed in favor of the LPO. Please remove the line in question from the Wikipedia entry. --Jerrydefoe 08:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. I don't own the article so you are free to edit it yourself. Sorry if my above comment sounded snarky, but we don't like it when anonymous editors delete things without any discussion on the talk page and without using an edit summary--this usually comes across as either vandalism or POV-pushing. I don't really have much interest in the article itself, except to remove what looks to me like vandalism. I'd suggest making the changes, adding cited sources and using an edit summary, or, if you are not comfortable with that, posting your suggested changes to the article's talk page where other editors can get involved. (User Pete is a great resource for the political stuff.) Hope this helps. Katr67 16:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S. If you are involved with the party, I'd also suggest reading about conflict of interest. This doesn't preclude you from editing the article, but there are good suggestions about how to write from a neutral point-of-view. Katr67 16:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

You didn't sound "snarky" and I am not the anonymous editor and I have no idea who is (was). Also, I am aware and agree with the conflict of interest which is why I wrote in rather than edit myself. I'm not sure why I ended up writing here if you are not the owner. Sorry. Thanks for the advice and I will take your advice and write to the talk page. --Jerrydefoe 07:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, sympathy, connections, and misc.

Thanks for alphabetizing Medford notables I should have done that myself.

Sorry your getting flamed so much lately just for making following official Wikipedia policies and guidelines. It would help a lot if users would learn more about these and throttle back their egos. I copied your talk page's discussion to Deathgleaner's talk page, where he can read it.

I've been trying to find out about a world champion lumberjack of the 1960s and 1970s named Melvin "Mel" Lentz. It's a little hard to find stuff here in Jackson County, what with #@*&!~ closed libraries and all. I'm sure he lived in Creswell, Oregon in his competitive years. Since he and Fircrest chicken are Creswell's 2 best known exports, I think we should put an artcle up about Mel and a link to Creswell. Can you help? I would also like to put in more about Larry Mahan, one of the greatest rodeo cowboys of all time, who competed out of either Salem or Brooks, Oregon. Same research handicap.

I see you are a fencer. Do you know our fellow Oregon Wikipedian Brady User:Bradybd ? I do volunteer work with him. He studied with Gay Jacobsen D'Asaro. Also do you know my other buddy, John McDougall [9], who also knows which end of the epee to hold?

I see you are a UU. I have always identified as one, and used to teach Sunday school at the Ashland fellowship.

Keep up the good work and keep being BOLD.DaKine 17:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fencing. Cool! My friend and fencing instructor, Twisted 86 has done some training under Maestro McDougall. I've met one other fencer from the Ashland area, Joel, but I've only been fencing for a few months, so I don't have the guts to compete in tournaments and possibly meet more of those folks. More later, I'm supposed to be working. Cheers! Katr67 18:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey man, sympathy back atcha about your libraries... :( Katr67 17:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)