User talk:RJN/Archive 17

Crime subtopic

I wonder why you have recently reverted the crime section to an outdated status with data from 1996 (e.g., gang crime) while ignoring referenced data from 2007 and 2008 on homicide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.249.84.215 (talk) 16:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Nicknames of Houston

Thank you, RJN. As I am sure you can tell from my comments on the article's talk page, I believe this is an article, NOT a list. This is true despite the fact that every list should aspire to be as comprehensive and well sourced. But, so should most articles. Lists are sub-encyclopedic without the type of context provided by this article. Nicknames of Houston is clearly a full-fledged good article, and should be rated as such. Thanks again. --Evb-wiki (talk) 21:08, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

List of Houston neighborhoods

Please review and participate in the discussion to determine if/how Houston neighborhood articles should be merged/redirected to List of Houston neighborhoods. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 21:53, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Email

Is your email active? I need to discuss something with you. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 21:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Sent. Postoak (talk) 22:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Memorial City merge proposal

Hi! I understand you posted a merge proposal at Memorial City, Houston - But I don't see a rationale on the talk page. Is it alright if you post a merge proposal on the talk page?

BTW keep in mind Memorial City is a Texas Legislature-established management district, and that is why I think it should be separate from the general Memorial, Houston article. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:57, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:41, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Nicknames of Houston

I noticed that you reverted my move from List of nicknames of Houston back to Nicknames of Houston, saying that it was an article. Actually, it is a featured list and should begin with "List of" per WP:LISTNAME. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:16, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Galveston_Bay_Area#Sources_.26_OR

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Talk:Galveston_Bay_Area#Sources_.26_OR. Thank you. Nsaum75 (talk) 07:13, 24 September 2009 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Email

Hi, please activate your email. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 16:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Chat

Hi, I have Google talk. Postoak (talk) 07:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

GBA

RJN, I REALLY appreciate your efforts here. This is a great show of good faith and I was not expecting it. For the first time since this all started I feel that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. You deserve congratulations for going the extra mile to be accomodating (and perhaps I deserve to be flogged for being so harsh). Let me review where things stand and we can discuss more later. Thanks again. --Mcorazao (talk) 18:47, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

So let me propose how we move forward. Obviously there are still some signficant disagreements between us but I'm hoping we are building enough trust now that we can move to a collaborative effort.

• There are some issues that you have mentioned that I had a long time ago tried to get input on to build consensus. Unfortunately when I tried to solicit input I got none. I'd like to try again and settle these questions once and for all (i.e. it is not constructive to keep rehashing the same issues).
• For some of the other issues of phrasing I'd like to suggest that I go ahead and just try to adjust your edits in the article. You can, of course, feel free to re-edit as you see fit.

Reasonable?

--Mcorazao (talk) 03:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I have set up a discussion forum on the talk page to settle the unresolved issues. Your comments would be much appreciated.

--Mcorazao (talk) 15:55, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Can I ask that at least the boundaries question be discussed soon? We need to get rid of banners in the article.

Thanks.

--Mcorazao (talk) 18:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Sugar Land, TX

Hey RJN, I notice you've been doing a lot of good things about the Sugar Land article, ie: the u of phoenix spam. I have, however, retagged the article with {{advert}}, which I noticed you reverted a while back. I thought I'd let you know and give you a chance to weigh in on the talk discussion Talk:Sugar_Land,_Texas#Woah.2C_woah.2C_woah.2C_bros.2C_NPOV.21. Cheers! --98.227.159.142 (talk) 19:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

FYI: GBA

I don't know if you still have an interest but there has been more discussion in the forums on Galveston Bay Area. Please feel free to weigh in before these topics are closed.

Thanks.

--Mcorazao (talk) 18:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Your moves

I am reverting the moves that are removing the spaces from the dashes. Please see WP:DASH, and provide an edit summary when moving. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, it doesn't matter that the organization doesn't use the "proper name", or punctuation. Many websites don't necessarily use dashes when they should, but that doesn't matter to Wikipedia; we use dashes and correct spacing as per our style guidelines. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

For the first point, I was referring to "Spacing: All disjunctive en dashes are unspaced, except when there is a space within either one or both of the items (the New York – Sydney flight; the New Zealand – South Africa grand final; June 3, 1888 – August 18, 1940, but June–August 1940)." I'll concede on the universities articles, but the bilateral relations moves should not have been made. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:23, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Apologies on my terse and ambiguous comment. The en dash was correct; the spacing was not. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

RJN, MOSDASH says: "Spacing: All disjunctive en dashes are unspaced, except when there is a space within either one or both of the items (the New York – Sydney flight; the New Zealand – South Africa grand final; June 3, 1888 – August 18, 1940, but June–August 1940)." This is to prevent the unfortunate gluing together of "Canada–United", which sounds more like the name of some new airline. Above, you're referring to the use of spaced en dashes as interrupters, not to show disjunctions. Tony (talk) 07:07, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the moves are incorrect. For example "Lone Star College–University Center" seems to indicate it is the Lone Star "College–University" Center, whereas Lone Star College – University Center represents "Lone Star College" – "University Center", which it is. I consent to reverting these moves back. I don't have time now but will get round to it this weekend if no-one else has done it by then. Best, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I've reverted a few here. For the University ones I still think they are wrong because, although the official sites typeset them as unspaced, Wikipedia usually applies its adopted style in this kind of case. For example we don't use Wikipedia:CamelCase. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree with Rambo. As Tony says above, unspaced en dashes always stand for disjunction, while spaced en dashes can stand for disjuntion for elements with internal spaces, or as interruptors – as I just used this spaced en dash here. For another example of an article using a spaced en dash as a separator, see the featured article Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's road race. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Cougar High

If reliable sources describe "Cougar High" as a nickname used for U of H, then it actually would make a plausible redirect. However if no sources state so, then the redirect would make no sense. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)