User talk:117Avenue/Archives/2013.2

Blood 148, Alberta

Re: Map scale on your latest revision: Do you really like these maps to zero in on the central part of a large area? It's (only?) my opinion, of course, but I believe that my map scale in the preceding edit would tend to give better information about the location of the reserve. Backspace (talk) 19:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

You're right, the infobox is made for cities, and the Blood Reserve is larger than some counties. 117Avenue (talk) 02:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Sturgeon Lake 154

The Statcan map (linked to in the article) indicates that Sturgeon Lake 154 is separated from Sturgeon Lake 154A by perhaps 2 km or so. Backspace (talk) 17:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

And? 117Avenue (talk) 01:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't it you who said that that they bordered each other? How can they border each other and still be two km apart? Backspace (talk) 02:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I said 154 and 154B bordered each other. 117Avenue (talk) 03:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, we are talking about 154 and 154A. There is no such thing as 154B, not in the latest 2011 census at least. As the Statcan map shows, there is only the larger 154 and the smaller non-adjacent 154A. If there was a 154B, it may have been from some previous census and may have been since combined with 154. Backspace (talk) 08:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Secondarily, re: false precision, how does 117°28'29" round off to 117°26'? Backspace (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

A good example of false precision, changing the minutes still leaves the coordinates in the centre of the landmark, seconds are unnecessarily precise. 117Avenue (talk) 01:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

At 26 minutes instead of (say) 28 or 29, I must admit that my coordinates were closer to the center than yours. I believe that the CGNDB must have inserted the seconds for some reason, not just to have random irrelevant seconds. This place is not huge (like a province), so seconds can definitely make a difference. Backspace (talk) 02:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I was using a Government of Alberta Sustainable Resource Department map, which divides the territory shown in the CGNDB map into a west portion, 154B, and an east portion, 154. I was providing the coordinates for the centre of 154. I guess the better question is, is the article just about 154, or 154 and 154B? 117Avenue (talk) 03:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

As previously stated, if the current 154 was at some time in the past ever in two separate sections, they have apparently since been joined into one. Since the article states nothing about area size or population, there is no way of telling whether it would be the old 154 or the new (bigger) 154, assuming that it combined with 154B. All we know is, as of the 2011 census, there is no such Indian reserve called Sturgeon Lake 154B. There are only 154 and 154A, which are geographically separated. How old is the map that you are working with? Backspace (talk) 08:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

2012, but that's besides the point. In some cases StatsCan divides land into different territories than other agencies. Both Alberta Aboriginal Relations[1], and Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada[2][3] list a Sturgeon Lake 154B 97.1 hectares big. 117Avenue (talk) 02:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

• comment Not about whether or not these reserves are adjoining or there's another one as 117Avenue is indicating (?), but just to note this article doesn't even say WHICH band is on this reserve; I'm guessing a Cree group, maybe Danezaa though. And re reserves, many in BC for the same band are not contiguous and some are mentioned only in location or other band articles as they'll never have even stubs e.g. Chuchuwayha2C which is in the mountains 4 miles SW of Hedley, British Columbia, which is where Chuchuwayha2 is.Skookum1 (talk) 03:39, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

StatsCan may not have listings for 154B because it maybe has no population? It definitely exists, Backspace. The main cites for reserves should not be StatsCan, but Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, plus CGNDB/Atlas of Canada and/or in BC's case (can't speak for Alberta) the BC Names system (formerly BCGNIS). Either that or band government/tribal council info pages.Skookum1 (talk) 03:57, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

117Avenue and Skookum1 are correct. 154B exists and it is adjacent to 154. I included it in a map for work in the last 6 months no less. StatCan does not provide census information for every reserve in Canada. Typically StatCan only designates those reserves that are populated as census subdivisions. Hwy43 (talk) 04:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

This cite from INAC says 154B is four miles south of 154....but that could refer to their centrepoints/latlongs, not to the possibility/probability they might have a common boundary.Skookum1 (talk) 04:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Centre points is likely why that reads as such. I can assure all, they are adjacent. Hwy43 (talk) 04:38, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Simply not true regarding population counts. Statcan lists all parts of Canada by geographical land area, whether or not they have population. I can name you literally dozens of Indian reserves, mostly in British Columbia and Saskatchewan, that have zero population (or missing population statistics) that are listed by Statcan. Most of these, for rather obvious reasons, generate little popular interest and therefore have no Wikipedia article. Statcan indicates each statistical part of Canada by land area, and the sum total of all land areas must equal Canada itself. Therefore, if an Indian reserve were to actually exist (such as the possible Sturgeon Lake 154B) it would necessarily have its own listing or be part of (included in) another listing (in this case most likely Sturgeon Lake 154, but also possibly Greenview No. 16). Mathematically, logically, there can be no other possibility. All land areas together must add up to Canada itself. Backspace (talk) 17:10, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

If you absolutely need to see it to believe it, open this 12.5 MB map published by Alberta Transportation. IRs are a base reference layer. IR 154B is on the north shore of Goose Lake just as the AANDC (formerly INAC) cite indicates, bordering IR 154 to the west and north. StatCan may be the "primary and definitive source for population data in articles", but is not the primary and definitive source for all IRs in Canada. The AANDC is. You'll also see from the map that IRs 134A and 232 are located further to the southeast along Highway 43 between Fox Creek and Whitecourt. Neither of these are census subdivisions (CSDs) recognized by StatCan, and neither of these are populated. There is a total of 137 IRs in Alberta according to AADNC. StatCan recognizes only 81 of them (Table A on page 5) as CSDs. There are well over 1,000 in BC, yet StatCan only recognizes 419 of them as CSDs.

Your assertion of "Simply not true regarding population counts" is, well, simply not true. I did qualify above by saying typically. Yes, there appear to be some exceptions to that. The disclaimer here at AANDC about census material states "First Nations whose affiliated communities totalled less than 40 individuals are suppressed by Statistics Canada." This may explain why some the IR CSDs have populations of zero, when actually they may very well have populations between 1 and 39. Want to confirm for certain this is the case? Inquire with StatCan. None of us here can be absolute certain on this, so there is no sense debating it here.

Now that you have a map before your that proves 154B exists and its location, you'll notice by cross-referencing with StatCan's Sturgeon Lake 154 map that the geographic area of 154B has simply been rolled into Greenview No. 16's territory by StatCan. This is how the sum of all CSD land areas equal the total land area of Canada in StatCan data. Further cross-referencing with StatCan mapping, you'll see that 134A is also rolled into Greenview No. 16 while 232 is rolled into Woodlands County. Hwy43 (talk) 22:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Then obviously you agree with me (at least partially). After all, I was the one who originally offered the possibility that it could indeed have been included with Greenview No. 16. Other than Sturgeon Lake 154 itself, there is no other place in the vicinity where it could have gone. As far as the zero-population units are concerned, I can only offer data as the census serves it up. If they say that a census division (or any area) has zero population, I can only accept them at their face value. There is no way that I can determine the actual "real" population. There is no way of finding out what the "real" population is if it is suppressed by them. Suppose that the "real" population was not zero, but 5, and I somehow stated that as "fact". Then you would say "prove it", to which I would have no evidence to back up my assertion. I can back up my assertions when I say "zero population" only because there is accepted corroboration for my claim, which source I would have specifically cited, in this particular case being Statcan. Backspace (talk) 02:16, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, we did agree that 154B's land area must have been accounted somewhere. I also agree that we have to take StatCan's population counts of zero at face value. I failed to mention that the AANDC's census disclaimer appears to be at odds with StatCan's standard suppression technique for population counts. The standard technique, for privacy protection purposes, is to round to the nearest "5" if the population of the geographic entity is less than "15" people. Considering StatCan does publish population counts of IRs between 0 and 40 people (8 instances in Alberta), either AANDC's census disclaimer is wrong or is worded such that it can easily be misinterpreted. Hwy43 (talk) 03:19, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Sun article....there's actually three

Just saw your reversion on Talk:Adrian Dix. For the record there were two subsequent articles, successively more POV and negative than the first one, and which didn't allow comments for response; my requests/demands that the Sun or Lee retract the falsehoods in them were ignored/slid off ("I'm content with my article", Lee said, even though it had egregious errors and misrepresentations not just about me but about what went on with the article)......on the Sun's own search page it doesn't list the original article, though gives a non-functioning canada.com link for it, though that yields a 404 error at the Times-Colonist....rather than acknowledging their error, they seem intent on hiding it. Can provide you links for the subsequent articles if you think they should be included......putside of Wikipedia, I may publicly blog about this incident to correct the misrepresentations and take on the media's aping of what the IP users and SPAs wanted; to make this about me and not about their own abuse of Wikipedia for partisan purposes......Skookum1 (talk) 05:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't believe people should attack other people. 117Avenue (talk) 05:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Neither do I.....but I do believe in defending myself against unwarranted and FALSE accusations/reporting......this is a case in point, as I've said, why so-called "reliable sources" can't be taken at face value, and why reputable blogs (e.g. Rafe Mair, who's an expert in his fields, or Laile Yuile, whose research is always thoughtful and also forces major media to report on stuff that they try to ignore. The Sun is a rag, but never mind that for now; my point here is to address the further articles, since only one is mentioned in that template.Skookum1 (talk) 05:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

For ease of reference, here is the Sun search page for my name re these articles; I can't access them to link them directly because I'm past the 15-free-articles-a-month limit re their paywall. No way am I gonna pay money to them LOL.Skookum1 (talk) 05:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Just read the correct newer article. They are wrong about one thing, you are no longer in the top 400 by edits. I recommend you remove that userbox to prevent misrepresenting yourself. 117Avenue (talk) 02:02, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Since when is the new article "correct"??? And it's not the article that the template was originally about. The new article is even more POV and misrepresentative than the first one was; "correct" is hardly the word for it, or for Sunciviclee's conduct.Skookum1 (talk) 03:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, sorry, sorry. Totally not what I meant. By "correct" I meant I followed the URL User:Brianhe intended to add in his first edit. 117Avenue (talk) 03:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

That template says 'multiple media organizations'. Shouldn't that be tweakable to "a media organization" since it's only the Vancouver Sun we're talking about; even if it's replicated in the Ottawa or Victoria papers, it's still the same media organization (PostMedia aka canada.com). The template is highly misleading in its current form; and Jeff Lee should be indicated as being User:Sunciviclee.Skookum1 (talk) 03:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I have made the change. But please note that is now two edits I have made on your behalf, a process known as meatpuppetry. 117Avenue (talk) 03:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Quick aside, maybe it was due to your putting them in chronological order, there are only four cites showing, and even though the Metro one is showing, and its title field is there, it's asking for a title. Must be a code error somewhere, I can't see it easily.Skookum1 (talk) 05:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, my computer is running slow today, I wasn't able to make that edit as smoothly as I wanted. 117Avenue (talk) 06:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

4 Corners a stub?

Just saw your removal of the one stub from that article, but isn't it long past stub now? Not that it should survive, and yes I'm hostile to its existence as "trivia spam" like its parent article, but isn't it at least at start class now and all the stub templates should go?Skookum1 (talk) 02:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think I could give it an unbiased assessment. 117Avenue (talk) 03:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Dix article edit history

just saw your removal of the editorializing....go review the several edits previous..."Big-Dix" and the bit about him "liking children"......I wonder if Jeff Lee will report on this (hah! ... as if), and we should look at those IPs to see if they're the same ones as before.....Skookum1 (talk) 03:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't like how you like to investigate vandals, thinking everyone it out to get you. I provided my reasoning, I am happy with my edit. 117Avenue (talk) 03:22, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Call it long experience because of the past behaviour of their kindred on articles like Erik Bornmann and the BC Legislature Raids articles, and also in the ongoing attempts to "censor" articles, not just Clark's and Campbell's, where the "sanitizing" edits of the kind so loudly about re the Dix article has gone on regularly, as it has been during and since the election at British Columbia Liberal Party, which has had to be placed under admin-only protection because of an ongoing edit war there. And why shouldn't I look at an IP users' contributions, or any SPAs? People look at mine and "investigate" me about things that went on a few years ago...taking them out of context, of course. There is no Canadian version of wikiscanner that I know of, i.e. a listing of government and p.r. and ad firm IPs, but it's not like IP or SPA edits are innocuous and shouldn't be investigated for reference to "who's doing all this bulls**t"" If the same IPs that were bitching about the "censorship" of the Dix article are the same ones, or on the same servers, even, as those who have been trying to censor the leader and party articles, it's very much a real issue. Just saw this so replying, why I'm here is the following.Skookum1 (talk) 02:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Vandals will be vandals, let's just keep improving Wikipedia, teach others of Wikipedia's policies, and be the bigger man. WP:BAIT, WP:DNIV, WP:DENY, etc. 117Avenue (talk) 03:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Test edits to Joy Tanner

The edits to Joy Tanner are NOT tests! Please stop reverting them because I requested articles for these films and TV series. I've recently made my own sandbox, where my edit is indeed a test. Read this test article thoroughly and decide whether or not to approve it. Homechallenge55 (talk) 19:00, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Please stop making red links, it is not constructive. 117Avenue (talk) 02:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, those red links that I provided in this article should be. Homechallenge55 (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Élection générale britanno-colombienne de 2013

Bonjour, quand les résultats de cette élection sera dévoilée le mardi 14 mai, pense-tu si tu peux mettre quelque informations de la page fr:Élection générale britanno-colombienne de 2013, comme tu avais faite la page fr:Élection générale albertaine de 2012, parce que mon compte ne modifier pas sur Wikipédia français et mon adresse IP 204.237.12.81 a été bloqué pour 2 ans jusqu'à la fin du mois de novembre 2014. Godinpédia (d) —Preceding undated comment added 23:40, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I got several of your sock puppets on the English Wikipedia blocked, I am not going to help you circumvent a block. 117Avenue (talk) 02:54, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Here I translated it the same thing, except some errors of translation software:

Hello, if you think you can put any information of the page fr:Élection générale britanno-colombienne de 2013 (British Columbia general election, 2013), as you have made ​​the page fr:Élection générale albertaine de 2012 (Alberta general election, 2012) because my account does not change on french Wikipedia and my IP address 204.237.12.81 has been blocked for two years until the end of November 2014. Godinpédia (talk) 24 May 2013 (UTC)

BC General Election 2013

Hi 117 Aveenue,

The BC General Election page has some serious errors.

The most prominent of which is located within the synopsis of election statistics. In it the BC Liberals are deemed to have 45 seats before the election (dissolution) and 50 post election for a +/- of +5. Unfortunately, this is an improper way of determining seat growth.

Seat growth or reduction should be calculated by general election not current seats or indeed seats at dissolution since, MLAs resign, die and otherwise become ineligible to hold office during the course of a Parliament.

Therefore, the BC Liberals should be awarded +1 seats since they won 49 seats at the 2009 general election. The NDP total should be -2 since, in 2009 they won 35 seats. Whereas Greens should be awarded +1 and Indpendents 0.

In addition further down the page an author claims the BC liberals seat gain results in a 11.11% increase whereas if one uses election numbers not dissolution numbers the increase is 2%!

It is incorrect to use dissolution numbers to determine +/- results. I am unsure why anyone with a strong knowledge of Canadian government and politics would think otherwise. It is for instance not how major news organisations determine +/- nor political scientists.

I hope you will correct these errrors.

Many thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.59.86.61 (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The Liberals gained 5 seats, the NDP lost 3 seats. Who says otherwise? 117Avenue (talk) 22:05, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

City infobox montage

Hi there. I am interested in making a city infobox montage on Photoshop with some Creative Commons files. I was using your Vancouver montage File:Vancouver_photo_montage.jpg as an example. I was wondering (if you made yours on photoshop) what was the height and width in pixels of the background/page that the images were placed on and what was the height and width of each image? I have made one. 49.176.5.231 (talk) 10:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Commons does not have a size limit for jpg's, but when it comes to montages, you are limited by the smallest image. For the Vancouver one it was File:UBC aerial view.jpg, which is only 500 pixels wide. The resulting montage was only 864 × 1,606 pixels. 117Avenue (talk) 02:56, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

So each image placed into the montage has to be the smallest available size of the image on commons? 49.176.33.145 (talk) 03:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

No, I took the full resolution versions, and sized them down to sit against each other in a montage. 117Avenue (talk) 03:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I thought so. Do you have the sizes of each image that they were sized down to? Because I want a guide when I make my test one, which I will make identical to yours except with the relevant city images. 49.176.33.145 (talk) 03:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

There is no template for montages, after cropping an image it has unique proportions. The width of File:P1030295 - Vancouver - Stanley Park - totem.JPG is determined by the height of File:UBC aerial view.jpg, the height of File:Lions Gate Bridge at night.jpg is determined by the combined width of File:P1030295 - Vancouver - Stanley Park - totem.JPG and File:UBC aerial view.jpg, the height of File:Downtown Vancouver, 16 sept 2007.jpg is determined by the proportions of File:Millennium Gate.jpg and File:Vancouver - Burrard Bridge from over Granville Island 01.jpg, etc. You'll see my other montages are stacked completely differentl, File:Calgarymontage5.jpg, File:Edmontonmontage1.jpg. 117Avenue (talk) 03:55, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm up to adding a border on each image and for some reason it keeps getting it off, like you can't see the border edging unless I resize the image and then it just looks awkward. 49.176.33.145 (talk) 04:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Alberta cities map

Cities and city-equivalents in Alberta

Any constructive feedback? Finally biting the bullet and preparing some Alberta maps. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 06:05, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Funny, I am starting some Edmonton maps. 117Avenue (talk) 06:07, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Ha! I would eventually get to Edmonton, but will focus on Alberta for now. Are you using GIS with open data sets? Hwy43 (talk) 06:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

No, I'm doing it my own hard way, tracing over other maps. 117Avenue (talk) 06:11, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

"Majority"

Hi there, I noticed you reverted my edits to the pages on provincial legislative assemblies. I'm not sure how you get your numbers. Shouldn't the majority figure mean the seats the majority party has more than a majority? That is, if the seats needed for a majority is 15, and the party has 21 seats, then the majority is 7? I think that is the only relevant number to be included in these tables for "majority". -- Earl Andrew - talk 13:40, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Jwkozak seems to agree, he reverted your revert for the Sask Assembly: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Legislative_Assembly_of_Saskatchewan&curid=9013091&diff=558118504&oldid=558088649 -- Earl Andrew - talk 14:39, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I've never seen a definition for the "majority" row in those tables. But every table I have seen has been government seats minus opposition and independent seats. 117Avenue (talk) 01:23, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't make it right, however. A majority is 50%+1. So it would make sense for the measure to be how much above this mark the majority party has. -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

It's established convention, as you saw, on every Assembly article. If you'd like change bring it up for discussion. 117Avenue (talk) 02:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Green precipitation colours

In the discussion on the colours used in the weatherbox, you stated that you supported using standard precipitation colours and use violet colours for temperatures below 0 °C (32 °F). This question has been asked many times in the talk page but has not been answered. The question is why did you created a page (see edit history on that page) to include green precipitation colours as an alternative to the blue precipitation colours, even though standard colours are favoured? Ssbbplayer (talk) 17:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I always knew this discussion was inevitable, templates are for a standard across Wikipedia, giving users the option to do different things would mean they would clash somewhere down the line. I didn't bring it up at the time, because I didn't see the support for it. Since the pastel temperature variation already existed, and I had the time to write templates, I didn't feel like arguing when the green precipitation variation came up. 117Avenue (talk) 02:34, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Could you clarify it a little bit. Thanks. Ssbbplayer (talk) 19:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I never liked variations, I wanted one standard, but decided not to fight it in June 2010. 117Avenue (talk) 06:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Would making green colours the default colour instead of blue a good idea? I been looking at the previous discussions on the talk page for the template and none of them mentioned about making green colours being the default one. Even though you oppose using green colours, it does not seem like you strongly oppose it (for example in one of the archived discussions, you stated that green colours is natural). Ssbbplayer (talk) 17:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

CFB Edmonton

The sentence wasn't actually problematic as written. The raising of the flag is an annual event that begins every Pride celebration; the event just hasn't ever taken place on the base before, but at other locations in the city. Bearcat (talk) 07:18, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

The sentence did not make that clear. 117Avenue (talk) 02:46, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Lorem ipsum

Paragraphs 5, 6, and 8 of what? The given source does not contain any Js anywhere. – Smyth\^talk 14:12, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I use Template:Lorem ipsum. But the article itself says there are multiple sources for Lorem Ipsum text, so I don't know how we can say any letters are excluded. 117Avenue (talk) 02:18, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

There may be other sources mentioned below, but that section is clearly only talking about the Cicero source. It's not original research to say what that doesn't contain. And because the text is often used for testing purposes, the absence of certain letters is potentially important. – Smyth\^talk 12:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I would agree if there was an official text, but there isn't. 117Avenue (talk) 01:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Then logically you should have removed the whole sentence, which is what I've just done. – Smyth\^talk 22:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

The article is largely unreferenced. 117Avenue (talk) 01:14, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Iggy

I had amended something that another very POV IPer had put in and then "softened" see here for the first edition of the attack edit, then follow the sequence as whoever it is adjusts it so it soft-pedals the same spin; such childishness.....such IPs are the ones "we" should be tracking somewhere....I'm trying to stay away from political articles but have some still watchlisted; I'm not a Liberal but Ignatieff is so highly regarded internationally and in the UK it's bizarre to see the putdowns that surface about him on the home turf....Skookum1 (talk) 01:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

An IP added unreferenced POV to a bio, I reverted it, he was warned. Don't get worked up by routine Wikipedia. 117Avenue (talk) 01:48, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

worked up? Not about this, I'm just voluble and type fast and clarifying my position; this is a BLP issue, which is why I'd de-weaseled those edits, which you've since removed.Skookum1 (talk) 04:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Supreme Court of British Columbia

In case you are not aware, all courts in BC use the UK Coat of Arms as their symbol (it's a historical matter dating back to the 20s). The insertion of the CoA into the boxes were debated a long time ago and it is a settled matter.--Cahk (talk) 05:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I had no idea. I was going around cleaning up the vandalism of a user who had added other irrelevant government coat of arms to articles. Do you remember were the discussion was? 117Avenue (talk) 02:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

See User talk:Skookum1#Supreme Court of British Columbia for example.--Cahk (talk) 04:01, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I did see that, and I believe you, but why is there no reference of a discussion on the page's talk? 117Avenue (talk) 04:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Can't remember the details (this has to be years ago) ... might have ended up on an admin talk page because another editor and I went through the debate w/admin intervention.--Cahk (talk) 04:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Question about an edit you coded for template:cite episode

Hi there. Can you please take a look at this discussion? I believe that you made a coding change for {{cite episode}} that is generating an error message that is either erroneous, undocumented, or both. Or there is something I don't understand. Thanks.

And yes, I read through the long discussion that led to this change. I think that my two points are correct, however. I don't see where in the discussion the consensus was formed that |serieslink requires |number, which is also not documented in the template's documentation. Maybe I'm missing something. Jonesey95 (talk) 16:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Alberta history: Joe Healy and the Blackfoot

Thought I'd throw this by you; two image in Commons are of a Chief Joe Healy with Blackfoot warriors around him, File:Chief Joe Healy and braves (HS85-10-18746).jpg and hm, must have closed the other one's tab, it was similar. Did wiki-search for his name and two Alberta articles come up, Castle Mountain and Copper Mountain (Alberta) in both of which his mining activity and native employees come up; if this is the same Joe Healy, that is. It's quite plausible a major chief would engage in commerce and mining, but there's no indication in the wiki articles that he was aboriginal; an easy enough name for it to be completely non-native of course, just wondering if maybe he was a well-known figure in Alberta history and if it's the same person as the chief in that picture.Skookum1 (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no idea. All I've retained of Alberta history from my school years is what I've relearned in my 4 years on Wikipedia. I don't remember learning much about aboriginal leaders in school. 117Avenue (talk) 22:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Capture d'écran

Hi, this is one of my few contributions to Wikipedia and I am really proud of it... Can you please keep the Pauline Marois picture?--Samounet (talk) 00:25, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

As I said in removing it, what we already have has better lighting. If you would like to change it, please garner consensus on the article's talk. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 00:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I wrote something on Mme Marois's page in the talk. Please help me.--Samounet (talk) 01:13, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Persondata

Hi 117Avenue, I'm hoping you can help me with something. I ended up in the article for Stereo Mike where for some reason the persondata is appearing in the article text. I've attempted to fix this, but I have no idea what's going on. I even tried copy and pasting the persondata from another article and add the subjects info, but no matter what I do, it still appears in the text. When I preview it looks ok, but when I save, it's still there. If you have a chance, can you take a quick look and see what I'm missing? Thanks. Cmr08 (talk) 05:27, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

{{col-begin}} was opening a table that wasn't closed. 117Avenue (talk) 05:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I figured it was something simple like that. Cmr08 (talk) 19:04, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Shay Carl

I know about WP:BLPREMOVE, but the YouTube statistics are not about the actual person and the numbers are not potentially defamatory material. Please just tag the entries as requiring sources, and we'll work on this. --82.170.113.123 (talk) 12:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

The Shay Carl article isn't as bad as some others I've had to remove VidStatsX references from. Some use the website for channel rankings, which is potentially defamatory material because it is potentially wrong, stating a person is more or less popular than they actually are. 117Avenue (talk) 01:47, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Vidstatsx

I have reverted your edits on Natalie Tran. I see that you're on a quest to remove Vidstatsx as a source on wiki, and you removed a lot of data from the Natalie Tran article based on that data. I have read the discussion at WP:RS. While I think you may be factually right, I don't think you have consensus for these mass removals and I'd like to open a discussion to figure out what we can do to resolve the issue. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking the article's talk would be a good place for such a discussion. 117Avenue (talk) 04:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

But no one has joined me there yet. 117Avenue (talk) 04:33, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. I would take this issue to the noticeboard but there was a small response last time. I think I'm going to post an RfC to get community input. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Template:ETS LRT future

Please review. Thanks. Useddenim (talk) 01:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

What purpose would it serve? All of the station articles are linked to from Template:ETS LRT route. 117Avenue (talk) 02:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Absolute overkill! Secondarywaltz (talk) 03:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Purpose? As mentioned elsewhere, you kept removing references to future expansion ([4] [5] [6]) from the existing template, so rather than get into an edit war I created a second template. The advantages of an RDT over a .png (or even .svg) map are the ease of updating and to ability to wikilink. Just because you don't like someone else's contribution is no reason to have it deleted. Useddenim (talk) 03:57, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

That was the issue? The solution to an edit war is discussion, not forking. I replaced the stations with links to the article sections where the future expansion is explained. I see no need to expand the route diagram beyond what exists, it is like a navbox filled with entries that don't have articles. You should have just brought this up when you thought you disagreed with me instead of going to the trouble of writing a new template. I had no idea we had a disagreement. I just wanted to know what you had in mind for the template when you asked for my thoughts on it. 117Avenue (talk) 04:33, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Yup, that was it. Close both deletion proposals with Keep? Useddenim (talk) 11:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't been convinced to change my vote on Template:ETS LRT future. 117Avenue (talk) 00:24, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Column formatting

See this edit summary. Do you know a way to tighten up the two columns yet maintain a little bit of whitespace between them? Hwy43 (talk) 06:21, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Make a table (still with {{col-begin}}) that isn't 100% of the page width. 117Avenue (talk) 20:45, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Hwy43 (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Revert on VGHS episodes

You reverted my edit on the episode list of VGHS because it missed a source. However, I linked a tweet of one of the show's authors as a source, which was already used on that page as a source. Please undo your revert. (@wiki community: reverting a new users' last 3 edits without a correct reason is rather dismotivating. No wonder you have problems finding new editors). Denvercoder9 (talk) 22:34, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I saw the tweet, and it did not say the title of the episode. Please don't add poorly sourced content. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 22:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Oops, copied wrong tweet nr. Sorry. Denvercoder9 (talk) 22:58, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

also, if you revert with "source doesn't support claim" or something next time, that's a lot more helpful than a generic message. Denvercoder9 (talk) 23:02, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

It looked like the common vandalism that page has seen. 117Avenue (talk) 23:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)