User talk:BaronLarf/Archive 4

Archives: 1A—1B—1C—1D—1E—2;—3

Welcome[edit]

It's good to see you back editing in here, no matter if it's temporary or permanent! I hope things are well for you! Royal broil 01:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Good to be back... for the time being.--Baron Larf 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back also-RFD (talk) 21:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Baron Larf 21:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks-[edit]

Many thanks for putting WP-Wisconsin template on lots of these categories and articles pertaining to Wisconsin. People who start articles, categories, templates relating to Wisconsin do not always do it-RFD (talk) 14:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1st Wisconsin Legislature[edit]

I look at the article you started on the 1st Wisconsin Legislature. I had to restore the redlink for Hugh Long there is a Hugh Long, but he is a British chemist. William Rainey Marshall, who was Governor of Minnesota, served in the Wisconsin Assembly-he is interesting. I had to change his article that he got his political start in the Minnesota Territorial Legislature-not true-it was in the Wisconsin Assembly.Many thanks again-RFD (talk) 00:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took care of removing some redlinks from the 99th Wisconsin Legislature article. However, I mention on the talk page of the WP-Wisconsin projects board that more articles of members of the present Wisconsin Legislatur are needed. Orange Mike pointed this out to me. However, I am not into politics/political science-I am more into the history about people founding communities, etc, in Wisconsin and somehow ended up in the legislature-Thanks-RFD (talk) 13:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the Wisconsin Assembly articles are the same listings of members in the 99th Session-however, many of the names are not wikified-these people need articles to be done-I hope some one doing the articles will use the 99th Session article as a masterlist and then wikified as need be in the Wisonsin Assembly article. Easier for everyone There is one state senator Jeff Plale a Democrat that needs an article he is the only senator that needs one-thanks-RFD (talk) 14:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dexter, Wisconsin[edit]

Would Royalbroil or yourself please look at the Dexter, Wisconsin talk page and see if it is possible to close the dicussion about moving the page to Dexterville? The original editor who wanted the move has not responded-Thanks-RFD (talk) 20:00, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, neither one of us should close the discussion, per WP:RMCI; we have a conflict of interest since we participated in the discussion. I'm sure another admin monitoring the move database will close it in the next 24 hours. --Baron Larf 20:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago external links[edit]

Baron, my link on the chicago page is not just some measly link, it's a link to ForgottenChicago.com, an organization that outlines specific topics for academic use. Please don't delete my link again on Chicago. Mike.damian (talk) 05:17, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read the guidelines at WP:USCITY. "A link to some of the official websites should be provided here, such as the official city government, the chamber of commerce, and the convention & visitors bureau. Providing links to every commercial, educational, or other entity within the city is not appropriate for this section. Information about such entities should actually be written into the article, with links to Wikipedia articles on notable entities. Remember, Wikipedia is not a linkfarm, and excessive lists of links on articles will generally be removed." Cheers --Baron Larf 05:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the link! Packerfansam (talk) 18:33, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Constant reverting[edit]

Why is he following me arround?[[1]] reverting evrything? Am I unwelcome here because I'm new??. Thanks--Mamalala (talk) 03:27, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have chosen to edit pages on very controversial topics, and have done so without providing edit summaries (see here). Then, when people change your edits, you revert them without explanation. This is the type of behavior often displayed by trolls. I would suggest that you discuss your proposed changes on talk pages, and try editing non-controversial subjects for a while to get used to the culture here before wading into long-standing fights involving Poland and Germany. Also, please be aware of the three revert rule. Cheers, --Baron Larf 03:39, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i'm sorry. baron, u realize that some articles here are controlled by nationalists and some by neo-nazis who silently are pushing their agendas, right? i noticed that while reading and comparing with slovak, polish and czech versions of the same articles. that is why i started my editing in the first place. but u r right i should start slow.--Mamalala (talk) 02:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I applaud your intention to make articles have as neutral a point of view as possible, I would suggest you assume good faith rather than attribute possibly Germano-centric articles to be written by neo-Nazis. Cheers --Baron Larf 06:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Constant reverting" seem to be a befitting headline: [2]. And block evasion, apparently. Evidence: Special:Contributions/71.81.137.167 Special:Contributions/24.182.186.67 Special:Contributions/Mamalala Common interests. -- Matthead Discuß 20:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. If you continue to be concerned, I would suggest requesting a sockpuppet investigation. Cheers, --Baron Larf 06:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin Area codes?[edit]

I'd like to add the area code to articles on municipalities in Wisconsin. Any idea where we could come up with a reliable database of area codes vs municipality? The next question is wondering how we could automate adding them. There has to be a better way than using an WP:AWB. I see that User:CapitalR used the CapitalBot to add the area codes to New Jersey. I asked at several locations, including WikiProject United States. Royal broil 04:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, and good question.

Website one: 414, 262, 920, 608, 715.
Website two: 414, 262, 920, 608, 715

I have never used a bot before, so I'm not much help in automating. (Oh, and thanks for catching my mistakes with the area codes on Fond du Lac County municipalities).--Baron Larf 05:18, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. They came up on my watchlist since I started them. I knew they were wrong, since 262 area code only goes north to southern Sheboygan county and West Bend. I didn't know about New Fane. Another consideration is Area code 274 and Area code 534 which will be overlays for the 920 and 715 area codes. Royal broil 05:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw that too. If the bot was run to set up the area code listing, it should not be that hard to re-run it when those area codes come online next year and 2012. (Another issue, eventually, will be the fact that those two area codes have separate articles; it seems like the trend is to merge articles together for overlays, as in Area codes 281, 713, and 832 or Area codes 503 and 971. --Baron Larf 09:37, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea of merging these area codes into one article. It's probably best to automate the dual area codes with 715 / 534 right away since summer will come quickly and it's theoretically possible to use the 10 digit calling already [3]. 920 / 274 will first permit 10 digit dialing starting in the spring of 2011 [4], so we should wait with the dual area codes for that area right now. Royal broil 01:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bayport, Wisconsin[edit]

The article on Bayport, Wisconsin was excellent. However, I removed the Towns in Wisconsin category. Bayport is no longer a town in Wisconsin. Please see Preble, Wisconsin article for a similiar example. I did substitute the History of Wisconsin instead. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 13:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC) PS-Wisconsin needs a Former Settlements in Wisconsin category; most of the other states in the Union have one. Bayport and Preble could be included also the old towns of Lake, Milwaukee in Milwaukee County could be included. There is a 3rd one I can not recall right now. Please see Bayport, Wisconsin article I put it in redlink-Thanks-RFD (talk) 14:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, thanks --Baron Larf 17:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hope your break goes well-RFD (talk) 17:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tadeusz Kościuszko[edit]

Hello, I noticed that you protected one article effected by 99.64.215.189 IP disruption. Could you please take measures on the Tadeusz Kościuszko article, as the same disruptive IP repeatedly deleting sourced info? M.K. (talk) 17:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC) p.s. I also asked assistance on WP:RFPP.[reply]

i'm sorry. but my edit was not disruptive. The source removed does not say that Kościuszko is a hero in Bielarus. Could you find a better source for your claim instead of trying to silence me by describing my edits as disruption?--71.81.137.167 (talk) 19:53, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Straight forward disruption [5]. Address your grievance on talk page, rather then conduct wholesale deletion of referenced text, next time. M.K. (talk) 20:49, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was not straight forward disruption. None of the sources s. that Kosciuszko was Lithuanian[[6]] -"Polish general and statesmen". Please stop bad-mouthing & "block shopping".--71.81.137.167 (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

before making anymore speculations check the sources. Lost and found: the discovery of Lithuania in American fiction, ISBN9042022663 p. 23 "Both Kościuszko and Mickiewicz are known to have identified themselves as Lithuanian"; Engendering Slavic literatures ISBN0253210429 p.57 "...the leading role of Lithuanians such as Emilia Plater and Tadeusz Kościuszko"; The Story of Poland. 2009, p.239 "Thaddeus Kosciuszko, by birth a Lithuanian..." etc etc etc. Thanks for proving my point. I would not respond to any more assertions of yours as the picture rather is clear; if have grievance about article, address them on its talk page. M.K. (talk) 08:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been soft-protected, allowing those with user-names to edit the page. Please use the article's talk page to resolve any disputes. Cheers, --Baron Larf 05:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, M.K. (talk) 13:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Afd on Daniel S. Razón[edit]

Hi, as a previous contributor to the Daniel S. Razón article, it may interest you to know that it is currently being nominated for deletion due to unnotability. You can find the Afd on this page Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_S._Razón. Thank you and Happy New Year! – Shannon Rose ^Talk 18:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Baron Larf 05:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

u mad[edit]

Why are you vandalizing my Talk Page? Don't you have anything better to do?65.26.254.184 (talk) 05:03, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Posting text messages that claim to be made by a user other than yourself is a form of disruption. The edit on your talk page that was attributed to BaronLarf was actually posted by your own account (here). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 05:10, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking care of this while I was on a wikibreak, Barek. Cheers --Baron Larf 05:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Jerry Taff[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Jerry Taff. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerry Taff. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin resources[edit]

I found 2 resources-they are on the WP-Wisconsin talk page-Thanks-RFD (talk) 19:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re[edit]

Thank you, I was just about to write a request. Mamalala moving the lead in the background, the "Nazis have written this"-redlink and the delitionist-IP, all in a few hours, made me pretty suspicious of what is going on here. I have warned the IP and the redlink, and also left Mamalala a message, though a DIGWUREN formal notice might be more appropriate. To me, this does not look like new users not knowing what they are doing, but I will continue to adhere to AGF and NOBITE for now. I'd appreciate your input at talk, too - the article really is long, and people with slow internet may in fact have trouble uploading it. I will add more to the article's talk page. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 19:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to the dispute, and intend to remain neutral from now on about content since I took an admin role in protecting the page. Good luck too all in reaching consensus. Cheers --Baron Larf 19:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Expulsion of Germans after World War II[edit]

I reported you on ANI. Dr. Loosmark 20:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That seems a bit rash. Thank you for the notice. Cheers, --Baron Larf 00:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review?[edit]

Do you take peer review requests? I spent major time on a WikiProject Wisconsin article, and I keep thinking about nominating it for Featured Article. I listed it once and it failed because it was listed too long. Not too many complaints about the article, just not enough support votes. There were so much to fix on it - but I learned a lot. I'm now generating Good Article-level articles now when I spend the time. The article is on a NASCAR champion - Alan Kulwicki from Greenfield. If you want to edit it directly, that's fine with me. If you want to leave questions in a section on the talk page, that's fine too. I don't know what you think about the sport. Knowing your knowledge level of the sport would be helpful to gauge how easily it reads to a non-fan. Thanks for your consideration. I just added your talk page to my watchlist. Royal broil 00:15, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll look it over and do one of the things you mentioned above :^) I don't believe I've ever taken part in a peer review before, but I'll read up on the WP page for peer review and do my best. I'm familiar with NASCAR but I'm not really a fan, so that's the perspective from which my suggestions will come. Thanks for the note! --Baron Larf 05:10, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made comments at Talk:Alan_Kulwicki/Comments. Thanks, --Baron Larf 22:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks - the article is much better for your comments! I appreciated that you were critical - that's what was needed to improve the article. I have an article nominated for Good Article and I'd wait until that is done before considering this one for FA. Do you think that it's in good enough shape for nominating for Featured Article? There have been over a dozen people who have reviewed it already. Royal broil 05:29, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I really have been gone from here for too long to know much about the current FA criteria. I've only gotten one article to FA status, and I'm pretty sure the standards were laxer back in 2005. All I can say is good luck, and I'd be happy to look over articles you wish to submit. About your earlier question regarding whether Alan Kulwicki made sense to a non-NASCAR aficionado: It read plainly to me, and any questions I might have had about unknown terms were wikilinked. Cheers, --Baron Larf 05:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fairfax County Public Schools[edit]

I don't believe my edit was a copyvio as it is only part of what was said. I can edit it if that is what you feel is needed.

Did you even read what has been happening on that page? One of the other admins said instead of the other editor deleting what Tedicky added for someone to add the "other side". That is what I did, yet it okay for the other editor to continue to delete it? he has also reverted it back many - that's okay for him to do? Is there some sort of bias here? I can't help but ask are you friends with him?????? Because I am following the rules and not making personal attacks like he started with. 71.91.18.218 (talk) 03:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reworded the section to remove any copytight vios. It needs one more typo correction on the word "he" but I am afraid to attempt another edit.

71.91.18.218 (talk)

Can you respond on my talk page? I am not sure how to get back here to this one.

temporary full protection. Repeated deleting of sourced content and another editor is constantly reverting my edits to balance the article as another administrator suggested be done on the talk page. I have remedied any copyvio. 71.91.18.218 (talk) 03:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

71.91.18.218 (talk) 03:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Reply posted on anon IP's talk page--Baron Larf 05:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - I have protected the Fairfax County Public Schools article from editing due to the current content dispute. I have left the current edits in place because they appear to be good faith attempts to address your copyvio concerns, but I do not endorse one postion or the other. I'll leave that for discussion on the talk page. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 04:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good call. I also have no opinion on the matter, just noticed there was an edit war and material copied from a CNN transcript. Cheers,--Baron Larf 05:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 05:14, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the info... I did copy and paste, in fact that is why there where caps, oops. The caps were a header from the transcript. I wasn't yelling like using caps, not intentionally anyway. I thought of that right before I did the last edit and made the changes to not be a cut and paste, etc... I am trying to work with the other editor to present both sides- as was suggested by another editor. I am not familiar with all the terms, etc. I will keep trying to work with him. At least now hopefully he will work with me since there is an edit block. I think it seems pretty well balanced now, or more to his side if anything. Hopefully it will be enough. Thanks. 71.91.18.218 (talk) 08:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies[edit]

Sorry about the edit comment about Kenosha. I must had push the wrong key. Hope you are well-Thanks-RFD (talk) 11:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, no I thought it was funny! Cheers--Baron Larf 18:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello BaronLarf! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 939 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Tomislav Mužek - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Dale Duesing - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:22, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mr. Dashbot. All taken care of.--Baron Larf 21:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The old town of Rochester, Wisconsin article-[edit]

The town of Rochester, Wisconsin was consolidated with the village of Rochester in Kenosha County. Should the article be deleted or redirected to the village article? Thanks-RFD (talk) 20:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw your comment on that edit summary. I think that it should be redirected to the village article. There is no apparently unique history to the town that would justify having an article on the historic entity. (Unlike Bayport, Wisconsin or Granville, Wisconsin.) A part of the town just incorporated, and then that village annexed the rest of the town. Do you want to be bold and make the redirect? I don't think there's enough traffic on that article to justify adding merge tags. Cheers--Baron Larf 20:27, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mission accomplshed-Thanks-RFD (talk) 20:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contemporary Christian music[edit]

BaronLarf,

Thank you for the prompting on the Contemporary Christian Music page. I am new at this and have no alternative intentions to adding to this project (just for the record). I DO appreciate your guidance and hope that I can better learn the ropes as I get accustomed to the process. By the way, you mentioned that I "re added" the info. I don't know what you mean by that. As I "clumsied" my way through the wikipedia process of explaining why I added the text, it did disappear and I selected save again, but I had no idea that it was missing after I added it.

In review, I hope to be a benefit to this project not a hinderance and the non-judgemental, non-condemning approach with which you brought that to my attention was so appreciated. Thank you and bless you. Mark (CCM-RADIO)CCM-RADIO (talk) 10:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The the external links guideline and spam guideline help to explain the consensus we have all reached regarding what should go into the external links section of articles. As to "re-adding," my message stated that you should discuss the links on the WP:talk page of the article (here) before re-adding them, not that you had already re-added them. Thanks for your contributions, and please let me know if you have any other questions. Cheers, --Baron Larf 11:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC) (Message also left at User's talk page)[reply]

Hello again. Former CCM-RADIO account reopened (as directed by Edward181) and would ask for a few minutes of your time to constructively discuss (as you have done in previous) how I might resubmit the article on CCM-RADIO without it being considered selp promoting (beyond the external links to our site) I appreciate the time you might offer. And thanks again for the time. (SMILE) Mark.

If needed, I can repost the original article in Talk here if needed. Thanks BaronLarf.

Mark (CCM-RADIO)69.110.139.123 (talk) 13:02, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To reply to the message you left me, User:Edgar181 deleted your registered profile (User talk:CCM-RADIO) since the name "CCM-RADIO" represents an organization. This is against this Wikipedia policy. I would suggest that you create a new profile that represents you, not a company. Secondly, Wikipedia frowns on editing articles with which you have a conflict of interest. I would suggest that you create and edit articles not having to do with your company. You may also request that someone else create the article at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Cheers, --Baron Larf 21:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)(Message also left at User's talk page)[reply]

Many thanks-[edit]

Many thanks for helping out with the Betty Cooper Hearnes article. I let WikiProject Missouri know and I put comments on the Hearnes article and that of her husband Warren Hearnes. I started an article about Ruth Bachhuber Doyle last year. She served in the Wisconsin State Assembly. Her husband was US District Judge James Doyle, Sr. and their son Governor Jim Doyle. I just hope no one gets the idea of redirecting that article to that of her son or husband. Thank you-again-RFD (talk) 19:42, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gile, Wisconsin[edit]

Gile, Wisconsin is part of Montreal, Wisconsin which is incorporated. Maybe you can merged and redirect the article. Thanks-RFD (talk) 00:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. I merged Gile, Wisconsin into Montreal, Wisconsin; Flintville, Wisconsin into Suamico, Wisconsin; and Dexter's Corner, Wisconsin, Carol Beach, Wisconsin, Ranney, Wisconsin, and Tobin, Wisconsin into Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin. Cheers,--Baron Larf 05:34, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks- for redirecting the various articles- That leaves Truesdell, Wisconsin and Nakoma which is a neighborhood in Madison for merger. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 12:03, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lake Hallie, Wisconsin[edit]

Here is another article of a village Lake Hallie, Wisconsin that was incorporated from the town of Hallie, Wisconsin in the last 2 years or so. You may want to look at that article. The village website is under construction. Thanks-RFD (talk) 15:23, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added a bit here and there. Thanks. --Baron Larf 21:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question what was the attack site on this article? My computer warned me not to touch it. I am glad you replace it. Thanks-RFD (talk) 22:03, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea, but "villageoflakehallie.us" was listed by google and my virus scanner as a malicious site. Cheers, --Baron Larf 22:07, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are a crook too[edit]

I see you edit lots of Wisconsin pages. No conincidence then that you're trolling the Hoofer and Wis. Union pages and reverting my edits. The truth hurts, doesn't it? Everything I wrote on those pages is absolutely true and verifiable. I'd add references but the pages get reverted so fast that I don't have a chance. You fucking loser.

Please don't forget to sign your personal attacks, User:BaronFark. Cheers, --Baron Larf 05:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta love the "fan mail"! Wow, running around with 4 sockpuppets just to push their agenda. How sad. Too bad this person didn't spend the time to try to work with you instead of trying to get in the back door. Royal broil 13:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I have no idea what's going on there... someone doesn't like that group.--Baron Larf 20:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jospeh E. Davies[edit]

Dear Mr. Baron, My mother and I went over her father's (Joseph E. Davies) page and added some first hand accounts. My mother was with her father in Moscow and on the trip to the Don basin in 1937 and with a memory like a steel trap at age 93, I am upset that you took many of these items out.

Also MANY of the questions re citations were deleted. They were put it at HER request! She also asked me to update the further reading to include MacLeans other papers and the books from his alma mater the U. of Wisconsin.

Re the confusion between MISSION TO MOSCOW THE BOOK, THE MOVIE and the BOOK ON THE MOVIE I have just spent a YEAR going over all three and am considerably upset about your editing my FOOD FOR THOUGHT.

Thank you. Mia Grosjean —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terveuren (talk • contribs) 14:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Baron, there was no copywrited material that I included that I did not get permission to use from the author, Elizabeth MacLean. I have a conference call with E. MacLean again this afternoon. Thank you. Terveuren (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Simply stating that you have permission from the holder of copyrighted material to use the material word-for-word is not enough. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. It is much easier to just paraphrase material from several sources and cite to it. Regarding research and interviews that you yourself have conducted, Wikipedia is not the place for original research. In addition, please stop adding long CV's to articles. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not the place to post résumés. Cheers --Baron Larf 19:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What I guess I do not understand is that other people have quoted from books in the article -- citing books and pages of books. However even after scaling way down on my quotes -- which you had asked me to do -- I'm not permitted to add one paragraph? Is there a number of words one can use?

Also un-published interviews with first-hand sources (ie Davies daughter who was with him when he was in Moscow) can NOT be used? What happens if she writes them herself? At 93 she uses the computer!

Also what do you do when sources that are referenced in the Wikipedia site go back to footnotes in a book which are incorrect, taken out of context, shoddy research (not reading other sources to verify a statement), or use no documentation at all. In light of this... several nights ago Dava Sobel (LONGITUDE) spoke in my community library and a question about the publisher's 'FACT CHECKER" came up. She responded, "there is no such thing as a publisher's fact checker any more." She did say that there is ONE magazine she knows about which does a rigorous job at fact checking. I was rather stunned.

Thank you for your help, it would be great to have your feedback Terveuren (talk) 12:03, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Hawks[edit]

Hawks is one of the best known bloggers on evolution and a key protagonist in the multiregional evolution debate. I linked 5 or so existing mentions of him in Wikipedia to the bio article, but there were more like 50 mentions of him that I didn't get to. --JWB (talk) 16:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I simply point to WP:PROF. Simply stating that someone is "a well-known blogger" does not establish someone as notable in my opinion. Cheers, --Baron Larf 20:24, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I read WP:PROF. He satisfies at least several of the criteria, for example highly cited. Any questions? --JWB (talk) 06:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't take this personally; I'm not submitting the article to AfD since I'm assuming in good faith (from your assertations) that Mr. Hawks is indeed notable. I would encourage you to include develop beyond its current stub so that notability is obvious on its face. The entire text of the article right now is "John Hawks was a Ph.D. student of Milford Wolpoff and is an associate professor at University of Wisconsin–Madison. He writes about human evolution at john hawks weblog, with introgression as one focus." Surely more can be added? The way it reads right now, he never actually received his Ph.D. and is only an associate professor. The external links go to several works he co-authored, but are they really highly cited? Has he made any impact on his discipline? Cheers--Baron Larf 06:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've just started the article and of course plan on expansion by myself and others. I'm replacing the orange-exclamation-point problem template that is used for severe problems requiring immediate attention with a stub template that is normal for stubs and that indicates the subject area, which adds it to Category:Evolution stubs where it can be monitored by people knowledgeable in the subject area.

Please take a look at Special:WhatLinksHere/John_D._Hawks which lists a fraction of the places where Hawks was already mentioned in Wikipedia; I haven't had time to link all of them. This both demonstrates notability and is a source for topics to be covered in the Hawks article.

The Google Scholar reference I originally included in the article lists some of his publications and the first results page alone includes Cited by 117, Cited by 87, etc.

I have to admit I did not anticipate the text could be interpreted to suggest that he had not received the Ph.D. - it is rare for those who have not to be hired as professors. --JWB (talk) 18:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the improvement tags until the article has actually been improved. Thanks, --Baron Larf 18:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You claim above you are not contesting notability, yet you are insisting on inserting a problem tag saying notability is in question and threatening AfD. Please be consistent. --JWB (talk) 18:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not listing the page at AfD since I'm hoping that editors can establish his notability on the article. I hope the page can be improved to indicate this. User:David Eppstein added a notability template on Jan. 22; I simply added additional issues tags. Meanwhile, no improvements have been made to the article since it was created. --Baron Larf 18:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eppstein has not responded to my message to him explaining notability or objected since then. I'm not sure what criteria you are using if many publications, hundreds of citations to them, dozens of existing mentions on Wikipedia and being a prominent figure in public evolution debates is not enough for you, you have not listed anything more specific than WP:PROF which is fulfilled. This treatment is highly unusual and out of line with other stubs which merely have the normal stub tag inviting elaboration on all points. I realize you said above you accept notability, but if you insist in contradiction to this on tagging the article as questionable notability and subject to deletion, anyone who comes along may attempt to delete it on grounds the tag is there. If there is going to be an AfD vote I would rather have it now than have it sneak through sometime when I am not paying attention for a couple of days. This is all distracting from actual work on this and other articles. --JWB (talk) 22:05, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I may, I would suggest just improving the article rather than keep going back and forth about the tags. They are not meant to be badges of shame, just a way to signal that the article needs improvement. --Baron Larf 04:54, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Burke (judge)[edit]

Yes, he's just a State trial judge, but from all the Google hits, even discounting the fiddler, there are plenty of sources to show he's notable. Bearian (talk) 22:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By that rationale, every state court trial judge is notable. Just taking the first five Minnesota state trial court judges: "Donald J. Aandal", "Jerome B. Abrams", "Ronald Abrams" hennepin, "David E. Ackerson" "st. louis", "Lawrence Agerter", all have thousands of hits. If simple google hits are enough to show notability, would you then be in favor of a standard where all judges in America are notable? Cheers, --Baron Larf 20:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin legislators[edit]

Wisconsin State Legislature-items that help[edit]

Hi BaronLarf many thanks for starting articles on members of the Wisconsin State Legislature. There are some things to keep in mind: there are categories involving the legislature. Wisconsin State Senators|Members of the Wisconsin State Assembly|Women state legislators in Wisconsin| You may want to add the categories as needed be. Also [7] is excellent especially before 1999. There is also the feature article about the Wisconsin Legislature in the 2007 Wisconsin Blue Book has a list of legislators updated to 2007. Unfortunately some names get omitted in one list that show up in the other list. Keep that one in mind. Also I have been using WPBiography template-talk page.I hope this helps-Thanks-RFD (talk) 15:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll try to start categorizing better. I've been watching what you've been doing to the articles, and trying to mimic your edits (such as using the "DEFAULTSORT" template). It's been a while since I edited, and I'm a bit rusty–I'm sure there are also categories out there now that weren't there before, that I'm simply unaware of. I appreciate the feedback. I'll take a look at that Blue Book article, too. --Baron Larf 21:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many of these state legislators- Wisconsin & other states-had interesting lives.One Davis Hanson Waite served in 2 different state legislatures Kansas&Wisconsin before he became Governor of a third state- Colorado-Thanks-RFD (talk) 22:02, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've started creating pages for each session of the Wisconsin legislature, modeled after Texas (e.g. Fifty-second Texas Legislature). See 1st Wisconsin Legislature for an example. --Baron Larf 10:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks pretty good. I did change House of Representatives to Assembly the correct, constitutional name for the lower house of the Wisconsin Legislature-Thanks-RFD (talk) 13:11, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a piece of interesting historical trivia about the name of the lower house of the Wisconsin Legislature. The proposed 1846 Wisconsin Constitution named the proposed lower house the House of Representatives. However the second Wisconsin Constitutional Convention that wrote the present document had members from New York State and they copied the document after the New York Constitution and the lower house of the NY Legislature is the Assembly-RFD (talk) 13:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That helps explain why my early sources call the lower house the House of Reps. I was aware that it's called the Assembly today, but I was thinking its name was changed somewhere down the road. Thanks --Baron Larf 13:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This gets more interesting some member of the Wisconsin Assembly introduced a proposed constitutional amendment to change the name of the lower house to you guess it the House of Representatives to be more in snyc with rest of the states. The amendment died a lonely death.It was in the last 10-12 years-Thanks-RFD (talk) 14:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to New York and Wisconsin calling their lower houses the Assembly, you have Neveda&California as well. In New Jersey the lower house of the NJ Legislature is called: the General Assembly-RFD (talk) 14:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recall in Wisconsin[edit]

Hi! Here is a suggestion for an article= Recall elections in Wisconsin. It would be under Wisconsin Constitution Article XIII, section 12. It was put in in November 1926. At the suggestion of Orangemike-I had been starting articles of members of the Wisconsin Legislature-Gary George is on my list and he got recalled a few years ago=corruption-Thanks again-RFD (talk) 17:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC) See also:[8]-Thanks-RFD (talk) 17:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I'll keep that in mind. I'm in the middle of trying to create articles for all notable people in a couple of old history books on Milwaukee County. There certainly has been some headline recall efforts in recent years--I'm thinking of Tom Ament and the pension scandal. There's also the interesting case of Victor Berger, who wasn't recalled but was not allowed to take his seat by fellow Congressmen. I'll help you guys out on this after I've finished with my current project. Thanks! --Baron Larf 21:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I experienced the Recall process twice-the La Crosse School Board 2 different recall elections. Some of the board members were actually recall twice!RFD (talk) 23:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I started an article about George Petak-he got recall from office because of his vote on the funding of Miller Park. I also started an article about Gary George (Wisconsin politician)-he got recall too but that was because of corruption-Thanks-RFD (talk) 22:14, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin Legislators[edit]

I am back to starting articles about members of the Wisconsin State Legislature. John Azor Kellogg served in the Wisconsin Senate. He was also a Civil War vet. Kellogg was captured by the Confederates but managed to escape. He wrote articles about his experience of being in the Civil War, etc. and the articles were collected and published in a book. Levi Baker Vilas was one of the first mayors of Madison, Wisconsin. His entry in the Wisconsin Historical Society Dictionary of Wisconsin History simplly mentioned he was a prominent Vermont politician prior to coming to Wisconsin. I did some research and found out he served in both houses of the Vermont General Assembly and was a probate judge prior to coming to Wisconsin. He served also in the Wisconsin State Assembly. Again many thanks- with your help on the Betty Cooper Hearnes article.RFD (talk) 13:26, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you-[edit]

Many thanks as always for helping out with the Joel Kleefisch article. I also started articles about Joan Ballweg/Lee Nerison who are also in the Wisconsin State Assembly. The fourth one I started was Robert Rowley a retired Episcopalian bishop who died in the last 2 days. RFD (talk) 23:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to get through current Wisconsin State Assembly members. I too am wondering why just the Demos got articles and not the Reps? Hmmm interesting...Thanks-RFD (talk) 13:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Gundrum[edit]

I may be interested in doing the article about Mark Gundrum who serves in the Wisconsin Assembly. Gundrum served in Iraq military law and is running for Wisconsin Circuit Court judge in the April 2010 election. Another article which I started and you might want to expand is Scott Newcomer. His divorce, financial problems, restraining court order, etc. Hope you are well.Thanks-RFD (talk) 14:23, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I look forward to seeing the article and adding what I can. Thanks, --20:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Got 4 more articles done Gundrum, Kramer, Murtha, Meyer-Thanks-RFD (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mursau done and 7 more left-again feel free to do some-Thanks-RFD (talk) 14:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Petrowski aricle was deleted copyright violation copied from Wisconsin Blue Book-can you do the article?-thanks-RFD (talk) 16:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't at the moment, but I'll do some in the next few days. Thanks, --Baron Larf 16:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for finishing up the remaining members of the Wisconsin Legislature. I diverted a little by starting articles about people who were no longer in the legislature Tim Hovel, Mary Panzer, and Mary's dad Frank Panzer. Again my thanks-RFD (talk) 23:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

98th Wisconsin Legislature[edit]

The 98th Wisconsin Legislature session has only two legislators Hines/Hahn to be done. If you want to finished this please do so-otherwise, I could do it. Thanks-RFD (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It's taking a while, since I'm also trying to make sure all the wikilinks and information are correct on 99th_Wisconsin_Legislature#Changes_from_the_98th_Legislature and Wisconsin_state_elections,_2008 as well.--Baron Larf 11:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks-also I update Ted Kanavas article he is retiring from Wisconsin Senate. I added citation from Wisconsin Historical Society his weblinks will be inoperable once he leaves office next year and the citation will be a replacement. Also I am taking short break from from starting articles about state legislators will be going back doing Roman catholic bishops-a change-Thanks-RFD (talk) 12:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC) PS Eventually an article about recall elections in Wisconsin needs to be done not in any hurry about doing that one-[reply]

I've got a question[edit]

Sorry to bother you, but I've got a question, and I didn't really know where to ask. I'm new here, and I'm trying to help revert vandalism, but I'm using Twinkle because it's very tedious to press undo all the time. I saw you using Twinkle, and I was wondering if it's better to leave a message to every editor when you revert vandalism, or only sometimes. I also don't know how you know what kind of warning to leave. Could you give me a little advice if you're not too busy? Thanks, --Just Me 21:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I use the the semi-automated tools (including WP:TW and WP:Friendly) to leave warning messages when I find vandalism and welcome messages for new users. I try to leave warning messages for every piece of vandalism, so that other editors can more easily see how many times the user has vandalized in the past month, and when a block is warranted. Happy editing!--Baron Larf 21:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Walker's proposals[edit]

Excellent job! --Orange Mike | Talk 02:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whew! Glad we could work it out. Great job on all your work on Wisconsin articles over the years... I'm a big fan.--Baron Larf

Great Midwest Trivia Contest vandalism[edit]

I'm getting very excited about doing the contest again this year! It starts next Friday at 10:00pm. I know you're a Lawrence alumni, so I expect you know what I'm talking about. I did the contest last year, and ran into major problems. When the right answer was on Wikipedia, someone would vandalize the page by removing the answer, then revert a few minutes after the answer was revealed. Only a person participating in the contest would be able to tell the pattern of vandalism. So I have to WASTE MY TIME during the contest (I'm still pissed about that!) to warn and block these idiots. Isn't it hard to believe that someone had such poor sportsmanship? So could I leave a message with you about the progress of warnings and would you deal with blocking if you are online? I'll leave warning templates with an edit summary about the warning number. Blocking after warnings is applicable in this case since we need to prevent this vandalism for the rest of the contest since they undoubtedly will do it again. A standard 3 day block at any point in the contest gives enough time to block until the end.

After last year's contest, I wrote an email to the Trivia Master complaining that I had to waste my time on unsporting people and how it took away from my experience. I asked that she let Lawrence staff know about it so they do something to address it for this year. She responding by saving that I need to use a reliable source and swept it under the rug. How sad. Royal broil 15:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, yeah, I've done the contest before. I've got lots going on this weekend, but I should be able to do vandalism patrol next weekend during the contest. (I won't be participating). Thanks, --Baron Larf 21:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added something on my talk page User_talk:Royalbroil#Trivia_contest. I called the complaint line and they asked teams to behave and be fair. Royal broil 23:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found an additional piece of vandalism that one of those anons wasn't warned about, and added a last-level warning.--Baron Larf 02:20, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I guess calling the radio station worked! I haven't seen a single thing out of place for a whole. I never thought that having the trivia masters complain at the teams on the air would work. There aren't too many more regular hours left and the garruda's are way too hard for Wikipedia. Royal broil 23:17, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it. All the vandalism came from Lawrence University IP's; maybe they got afraid they'd get their internets taken away. --Baron Larf 23:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, really! My friend is extremely web proficient, and he thought it was off-campus from Green Bay or Kaukauna. At any rate, it's been a lot better this year and our work has paid off. Royal broil 23:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not that proficient; I was just going from the WHOIS link on the bottom of the anon talk pages.(For instance, there's a link at the bottom of User talk:143.44.65.145 to http://toolserver.org/~chm/whois.php?ip=143.44.65.145 , which states Lawrence University has a range from 143.44.0.0 to 143.44.255.255. This is a handy link added in the last couple of years; it let me know in two clicks (for instance) that someone who works at Wisconsin Energy Corporation has been making some major changes to that article in the past couple of weeks. Glad to hear vandalism's been down this year.--Baron Larf 00:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism warning[edit]

Not trying to make trouble, but why did you give me a warning? I'm assuming you were referring to edits to Exxon Valdez oil spill; you had reverted an edit by 124.106.167.138, not the edit I made. Laoris (talk) 04:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, you are correct. Please feel free to delete that notice I left for you. Happy editing, and thanks for your edits! --06:53, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

It's no problem; thanks for all your hard work too. Laoris (talk) 20:54, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

George B. Smith[edit]

My apologies for any confusion on George B. Smith. Thanks-RFD (talk) 12:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No apologies needed. I screwed up by thinking he was George Bundy Smith, since that's where George B. Smith. Your re-creating the redlink called my attention to the problem. Thanks! --Baron Larf 19:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request[edit]

Sooo.... I seem to have accidentally blocked myself when meaning to block a vandal. (First time for everything...) Would some kind-hearted talk page stalker please unblock me? Thanks! --Baron Larf 22:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. NawlinWiki (talk) 22:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--Baron Larf 22:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't done this ... at least yet! That snickering that you just heard was me! I wasn't online when you made your oops. Royal broil 00:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies[edit]

Hi there BARON, VASCO from Portugal here,

About my edit summary at Javad Nekounam, i apologize sincerely: i know the editor did not vandalize, but i just lost it (unfortunately do now and then, anger management problems i suppose, and i am not being sarcastic) when i saw good stuff i had added was removed just because. Also, if you check the article's display after my contributions, you will see it has been improved (not that it justifies my antics, no sir).

Sorry again for the incovenience(s) caused, will try to improve my behaviour in the future. Keep up the good work,

VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for using the edit summaries... I would just leave out the "IDIOTS!" :^) Happy editing--Baron Larf 03:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin Legislature[edit]

I look at the 96th&97th Wisconsin Legislature sessions and repair some links in the 96th session. The Wisconsin Historical Society Dictionary of Wisconsin History is very helpful the legislator's bio in the Blue Book is reprinted there. The Wisconsin Blue Books also helpful. The Wisconsin Legislature's Spotlight is very helpful. If you goggled the legislator's name with Spotlight you will get info if they are retiring or being defeated for reelection. This leads into a concern about BLPs and the Wisconsin Legislature: Most of the articles about the recent Wisconsin Legislators uses their legislative website or SmartVote as some sort of reference in the external links section. However, these legislators will either take retirement or be defeated. I try to add the Wisconsin Historical Society as a citation for their legislative websites and SmartVote will be inoperable once they leave office and you will need a citation to replace the weblinks. A concern. Thanks-RFD (talk) 16:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yeah, I use the Bluebook at the Dictionary of Wis. History as well. We could use the wayback machine (and template:wayback) to capture pages; for instance, Archive index at the Wayback Machine for "http://www.legis.state.wi.us/w3asp/contact/legislatorpages.aspx?house=Assembly&district=3". Thanks for letting me know about Wisconsin Legislative Spotlight; I hadn't looked at that before. Cheers--Baron Larf 20:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing article about Wisconsin Land Commissioners!-RFD (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Was a good break from lists of legislators.--Baron Larf 22:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nueske's Applewood Smoked Meats=spelling[edit]

I added Nueske's Applewood Smoked meats article to the village of Wittenberg, Wisconsin article and I am having problems with the spelling of the title. Possible defect? I tried it out on the sandbox no luck-Many thanks-RFD (talk) 11:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was the smart apostrophe (or whatever the proper term for it is). I've moved the page to try to fix the problem. Cheers, --Baron Larf 11:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks-RFD (talk) 11:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Back again probably the same problem; Mama's Digdown Brass band new article added it to MadCity article same problem...sigh.Thanks again-RFD (talk) 11:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. --Baron Larf 14:14, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again-RFD (talk) 14:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibreak[edit]

I hope your break went well. Thank youRFD (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I did indeed.--Baron Larf 21:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tomah, Wisconsin[edit]

yo, i gotta give you credit that was a pretty quick deletion you made earlier ;) unsigned by 216.26.126.32

The CVU is always watching. ;^) --Baron Larf 04:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not actually from Tomah (tho I do say its a robust little town), but I guess its a logical guess seeing as its the page I vandalised and what not :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.26.126.32 (talk) 06:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cedarburg School District changes[edit]

Very disappointing that you deleted my text on the Cedarburg School District before I had a chance to make the attributions. I got up this morning, opened the page to start making attributions, and everything I'd spent 4 hours on the night before is gone! Congratulations, you're quick. Did you happen to save my text so I can re-post it with attributions? Or am I going to have to rebuild from my previous version?

Geez, did you think this was all just vandalism or what? If so, don't you read the Wisconsin papers? All of what was there is easily attributable in some form or another, and if you even just watch TV news some of it should exist in your memory.

In the future I'll be sure to post the attributions along with the text, but I think you could have at least waited 24 hours before trashing my work.

With few exceptions, almost all edits on Wikipedia are saved. You can see the history of a page by clicking on the "history" tab at the top of any page. For example, the version of the Cedarburg School District article after your edit is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cedarburg_School_District&oldid=344578061 . With the increased attention that is being paid to potentially libelous information about people, any controversial statements about living people must be sourced when they are added, not later on. (The policy is at WP:BLP). You shouldn't consider the rollback "trashing"; it takes all of us a while to get a hang of the policies and standards around here. Another thing to keep in mind is WP:Undue; does that article need 11 paragraphs about teacher terminations? Happy editing! --Baron Larf 20:21, 17 February 2010 (UTC) (Message also left at anon talk page)[reply]

Okay, thanks for the education. I see your points about undue weight . . . I'll rethink the eleven paragraphs. My thinking in adding content like this is to change static, sterile articles about institutions into something that gives a reader more the sense of WHO these institutions are (instead of WHAT they are). Controversy sections are often the way you get the sense of personality in an institution. I'm not an english major, a historian or a journalist; does this square with some thinking about what an encyclopedia (and specifically Wikipedia) should embody?

Also, try as I might, I couldn't come up with a way to find my old edit. How should I have found the page that you were kind enough to provide the link for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.195.199.134 (talk) 23:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here (click that word) is the article as it was after you edited it. And here is what is called the "diff"; it shows exactly what you added. You can find these things by going to any article, clicking the "History" tab on the top and then clicking either one of the many timestamps (for the old version) or where it says "prev" to see what each edit added or removed from the article.

The great thing about Wikipedia is that it is what we all (you, me, everyone else) says it is. You'll see the word "consensus" bandied about; all that means is that there have been tons of arguments about nearly every issue under the sun, and people have finally reached some compromise. And yes, I agree with you that a general discussion of those controversies at the Cedarburg School District would seem encyclopedic to me (though I am only one person). Edits about living persons just need to be sourced, and discussion of controversies should try to stick to a neutral point of view and be backed up by reliable sources. There are other views on criticism sections at WP:CSECTION.

I hope this isn't too much information all at once. If you'd like, I could take a stab at adding some information and sourcing it. Let me know if you have any more questions. Thanks, --Baron Larf 23:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC) (also replied at anon user's talk page)[reply]

This morning when I was in the history tab (page) for some reason I saw only three entries and each was of a fairly minor change. I went in and out of the history tab two or three times and didn't see anything else. Now when I browse that tab I'm seeing a whole page of changes including my previous additions. It occurs now that perhaps I was clicking the history tab on your comments rather than the article itself.

The information you've provided is all useful--thanks for taking the time. When I get some time I'll rework my additions accordingly and resubmit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.195.199.134 (talk) 04:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tavern League of Wisconsin[edit]

I thought you might be interested in this article about the Tavern League of Wisconsin. Thanks-RFD (talk) 00:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin NRHP pics etc[edit]

Hi BaronLarf, it's nice to see your work proceeding in developing the Wisconsin NRHP list-articles, including adding lots of pics. I am just revisiting some of them in order to clean up some old stray notes i had meant to get back to, and am pleasantly surprised to see lots of pics! I dunno if u r a member or not, but you'd be very welcome to join, wp:NRHP. And either way feel free to announce your new articles and pics on the main page of the wikiproject in the new articles/pics sections. Also, if you'd like help developing articles I for one would be glad to help, anywhere you have pics already. To do a decent article usually will require getting the NRHP nomination document, perhaps by request to the National Register. Anyhow, keep up the good work! Cheers, --doncram (talk) 20:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invite. I took the pics of some NRHPs around King, Waupaca County, Wisconsin while I was in the area, but I don't have enough information at the moment to make a good article. I was thinking of starting it/them in the summer, after I have a chance to revisit and try to get more resources. You might also be interested in Main Hall (Lawrence University), an article I was just in the process of creating when you left the above message. I've only created a handful of NRHP articles, so things might not be 100% standard yet. Cheers --Baron Larf 20:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, it looks great. I think i detect that you created the NRHP infobox manually, i.e. by cutting-and-pasting from somewhere and painstakingly entering the relevant info. There's an easier way: use the nifty "Elkman NRHP infobox generator" at http://www2.elkman.net/nrhp/infobox.php. You just enter name and state, and it generates a cut-and-paste-ready infobox with a bunch of fields filled out for you. It can include some extra info for you, such as in this example, the area of the listing. You can further edit the infobox thereby created, if you have additional/better info.

Also, i have started out many a NRHP article using just that level of info, but it is always good to get the NRHP nomination document for a property, which provides a whole lot of interesting detail and explains the reason for significance of a place really well. I happen to work on articles in some states where the NRHP docs are online, unlike Wisconsin I think. You can probably see some example NRHP documents linked from the Wisconsin NRHPs that are also National Historic Landmarks, listed at List of NHLs in WI, because the NRHP docs for all NHL ones nation-wide are available on-line. But they are available in some format or another for free, upon request, for every NRHP. Just try sending an email request to nr_reference (at) nps.gov, for the one you are working, say. They'll send it by return email if they have a scanned PDF version, otherwise by postal mail. Hope this is not TMI all at once. Again, nice job. --doncram (talk) 21:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, not too much information at all. Thanks for the tips and link!--Baron Larf 23:41, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that my lurking lead me to this thread! There's lots of interesting things that I didn't know about - mainly the infobox and getting an email request for the info. I've always created the articles without the info in my hand and I have done several which appeared on the main page. This is a great improvement! I haven't been announcing my new pictures - there's just too many - like when I did dozens in Neenah & Menasha, Wisconsin for National Register of Historic Places listings in Winnebago County, Wisconsin and hundreds overall. Royal broil 01:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Royalbroil, glad you find our chatting helpful. I lerned all my best stuff by lurking. :) About announcing pics, yeah, i don't really announce individual pics very often. I would make an announcement if i did a bunch tho, or if i got a particularly hard-to-get one like one of few List of NHLs in NY items still needing pics. It's a freeform announcement board, you can say what you want. Like the current February pic announcements are:

High Falls Historic District, newer, better photo added along with article expansion

National Register of Historic Places listings in White County, Tennessee — added 5 photos

Added about 29 photos to National Register of Historic Places listings in Chicago with an additional 20+ still being added to Suburban Chicago lists (mostly Kane County)

I happen to think we oughta sign our additions there, too, but current practice is not to do so. I like the extra commentary on an announcement line. Cheers, --doncram (talk) 00:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gainesville Florida Edits, Link, and IP Sharing[edit]

First off, definitely an IP problem as I never had anything to do with an author of a poem in April I moved in this apartment in May. Second off, you deleted great info about WEB MEDIA in Gainesville. Gainesville.com, GainesvilleFlorida.com, ApartmentsInGainesville.com, SwampRentals.com, Gatorzone.com all should be there. Finally, I added GainesvilleFlorida.com to the links page of the Gainesville, Florida page. That is spam? Oh please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.180.32.179 (talk) 04:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Please see Wikipedia:USCITY#External links. The comment about the University of Florida edits was left for your IP by another editor 10 months ago. Cheers, --Baron Larf 04:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of George Hampel (legislator)[edit]

Hello! Your submission of George Hampel (legislator) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Bradjamesbrown (talk) 13:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reponded. Thanks.--Baron Larf 15:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Donna Shalala[edit]

I though her opposition to needle exchange programs was common knowledge. There was a mass demonstration against her in my home town when she visited in the mid 90's They were upset over her opposition to these programs--69.248.225.198 (talk) 23:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, common knowledge is not enough. Just add a link to a newspaper article, though, and it should be fine. --Baron Larf 03:46, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Subcategories"[edit]

I have not added any categories to pages that do not already note the person's membership in that category. As to the the Wasielewski article and others, I note that you are of the opinion that if someone is listed as an "American Roman Catholic Politician" they need not be listed under "American Roman Catholics." I understand that this is how most people feel, but I disagree, because if someone is searching for pages under one category (e.g. American Roman Catholics) they may not necessarily search within other subcategories. If we are trying to eliminate redundancy, it would be better to abolish all subcategories and just have "Politicians" and "Catholics" and "Wisconsin People" et c. But since that is not the case, I don't see the need to streamline category membership. Anyway, thanks for your advice. Remclaecsec (talk) 21:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not merely my opinion, it is an editing guideline. Please see WP:SUBCAT. As for your examle of Category:Politicians and Category:People from Wisconsin, people listed in those categories should be further subcategoized into categories such as Category:Greek politicians and Category:Wisconsin Democrats. If you have issues with the existence of a category such as Category:American Roman Catholic politicians, I would suggest bringing it up at WP:CFD. But double-categorization is not the answer. Cheers--Baron Larf 21:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back to the opera project[edit]

Viva-Verdi (talk) 19:19, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Governor Peterson of Delaware[edit]

Thanks for putting the WP Wisconsin template back in. I put it in but an editor who is involved with the Delaware government took it out with no explanation. The editor also had at one time removed categories pertaining to the Governor's Wisconsin roots. I think he went by the name of Stiltim (sic?) Thanks again-RFD (talk) 11:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noticed that myself as I was adding the template. That's why I also added my rationale in the edit summary. Since the dispute seemed to be an old one, I decided against adding anything to the talk page yet about it. (It seems rather silly; the notice is tiny, since it's collapsed. All it does is help us patrol for vandalism, etc.) I also tried to improve the article itself, to try to show the editor that us Wisconsinites do have meaningful things to add. Thanks, --Baron Larf 11:37, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks-[edit]

Many thanks-I notice that the bot that takes care of new articles for WP-Wisconsin does add articles that has no direct connection with Wisconsin. The bot would add an article about some new plant that was discovered in Asia (just an example) and the reference would list some paper done by some researcher from UW-Madison the only nemtion of Wisconsin in an article about some plant that has nothing to do with the state so the bot adds the article-Thanks again-RFD (talk) 13:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... I'm guessing that Dual Freq may have used output from that bot to add to the list at some point. Even though there are false positives, I love that new article page though. It'd be pretty hard to detect new WPWI-type articles without it. Thanks, --Baron Larf 14:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Query regarding additional block template[edit]

Just curious, but why did you add another block template after the one I added at User talk:173.8.104.13? Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 01:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, my mistake. I must not have seen the anonblock template you left, since I'm used to seeing uw-block and schoolblock templates. I recall that at the time that I left the message, no one had yet undone that anon's vandalism to Super Bowl I, so I must have figured that a block was made but that a block template wasn't left or additional vandalism removed. Feel free to trout me. Thanks, --Baron Larf 04:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meow[edit]

Thanks for the cats. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:13, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

Nope, nothing was wrong, it's just with 300+ nominations on T:TDYK at any one time, things tend to get lost in the cracks, only getting noticed again when they fall towards the bottom. THe five day clock for DYK applies to nominations not to our backlog! (In other words, because a hook hasn't been commented on or approved yet, don't worry). Eventually, things will get taken care of; in this case, I have "signed off" on your hook now. (You'll notice that there are hooks older than yours that haven't received any comments yet, eventually they, too, will be processed). Bradjamesbrown (talk) 05:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info! --Baron Larf 14:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wisconsin Public Service Commission[edit]

Please take a look at the new article on the Wisconsin Public Service Commission. Smeone put a notable tag on it. Thanks-RFD (talk) 12:14, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found citation and added to it-ThanksRFD (talk) 12:52, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I won't be able to do anything today, but I'm watching the page now. If it gets put up for deletion soon, I'll be able to respond. I hope to expand in the next few days to show notability. --Baron Larf 14:45, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for unblock backlog[edit]

Hello. The requests for unblock page has a backlog. Just wondering if you could help. It not, please delete this message. Thanks.Chuckcreator (talk) 16:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've helped out on the clear-cut cases; the page no longer is in a backlog. Thanks --Baron Larf 19:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for George Hampel (legislator)[edit]

On March 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article George Hampel (legislator), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Ucucha 18:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for David Rendall (opera singer)[edit]

On March 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article David Rendall (opera singer), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Ucucha 00:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a nice hook! Nyttend (talk) 02:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :^) --Baron Larf 04:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can't be both ways[edit]

I intend to add advice on internal links to that section that you just reinstated, changing the title to "Linking". Otherwise, I believe "External links" should be removed. Tony (talk) 08:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully disagree. I've added a section to that talk page to discuss, per WP:BRD. Cheers --Baron Larf 08:21, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

I am confused as to why my edits are immediately being to made to the Generac Power Systems page when I have yet to finish. I am not related to Generac, but I would like the chance to finish uploading my research (and references) before my additions are immediately deleted. Please give me that chance. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Katekrejci (talk • contribs) 21:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you're talking about, sorry. You might wish to use the "preview" button more often, or use your user space to work on an article rather than make many successive edits on the same article. I haven't reverted any of your edits. --Baron Larf 00:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial uniformity in article genres, etc.[edit]

I don't know where remarks aimed at individual administrators are supposed to go. If this one aimed at BaronLarf is inappropriately placed, please feel free to cut and paste it elsewhere. In any case, my observation is offered congenially, collegially, and constructively, and I recognize the good work BaronLarf does. I have today removed two "Unreferenced" boxes from Wiki articles for "Choate Rosemary Hall" and "Northfield Mount Hermon" preparatory schools. (BaronLarf was responsible for the one at CRH.) The boxes had been placed at the head of the "Alumni" sections for those schools, apparently without comparison to Wiki articles for peer schools. I made such a comparison and found no "Unreferenced" boxes at the head of "Aumni" sections in the articles for such peer schools as Phillips Academy (Andover), Phillips Exeter Academy, Groton School, St. Paul's School, Hotchkiss School, Lawrenceville School, Taft School, Milton Academy, Loomis Chaffee School, Hill School, St. Mark's School, and Middlesex School. (Another peer school, Deerfield Academy had no "Alumni" section.) By singling out Choate for such an editorial "advisory" and leaving the other peer schools "unadmonished" BaronLarf was inviting an inference. (I don't think he was doing it mischievously.) As it happens, I have added to the Choate alumni list perhaps a fifth of its present contents, all of my additions taken from Choate literature, and I had not felt it necessary to reference that section precisely because articles for peer schools reference their "Alumni" sections either inconsistently or not at all. I hope Wiki administrators make it part of their routine to standardize and make uniform "Unreferenced" box usage within categories. Micheldene (talk) 17:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're trying to get an investigation on me, I'd suggest something like Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. But that's not the best way of going about resolving disputes. Nor is talking to people on their user pages in the third person, as you've repeatedly been told by other users in the past. Cheers --Baron Larf 20:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings-[edit]

Hope you are doing well-thanks-RFD (talk) 19:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, likewise. The warm weather and events in the real world mean that I've been editing less recently. But I still visit every couple of days. I have several pictures of unincorporated communities in Ozaukee County I keep meaning to add, too. --Baron Larf 16:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

		The Original Barnstar
		Many thanks for your work on Wisconsin related articles-RFD (talk) 23:03, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bristol, Wisconsin[edit]

The village of Bristol, Wisconsin annexed the town of Bristol in Kenosha County on June 29, 2010 effected July 4, 2010-a small section was annexed to the village of Pleasant Prairie. That means the unincorporated communities of Pikeville and Woodworth are now annexed to the village. The CDP of Lake Shangrila is divided between the town of Salem and the village of Bristol. I hope you are doing well-RFD (talk) 00:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bronx/The Bronx[edit]

Because you participated in a previous discussion on the subject, I'm letting you know that a discussion has started about opneing a Request for Comments concerning "Bronx" versus "The Bronx" as the article title. You can find it here Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:17, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back and thanks[edit]

Welcome back! Many thanks for the Wisconsin 2010 Elections article. I am trying to update the various elections results. Hope you are well-RFD (talk) 15:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Larry Speakes.gif[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Larry Speakes.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join WikiProject United States[edit]

Hello, BaronLarf/Archive 4! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 02:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of German Fest for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article German Fest is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/German Fest until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --MelanieN (talk) 15:15, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-a-thon in Madison[edit]

I saw that you are an admin in Wisconsin (based on your userpage), so if you're interested, I wanted to invite you to a humanities edit-a-thon in the Madison Public Library on Friday, April 25th (1:30–3:30). It'll be on the shorter side and is aimed at new editors, but I hope to see you there. More information is available on the 2014 UW Conference on the Public Humanities website. Let me know if you have any questions czar ♔ 04:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I work a nine-to-five job, so I won't be able to join you. Have fun! --Baron Larf 15:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to see your page pop up on my watchlist. I hope that you are well! Royal broil 02:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Back at ya! --Baron Larf 02:02, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Best wishes to all who participate! --Orange Mike | Talk 01:29, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity[edit]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, you scared me straight. I'm coming back! --Baron Larf 03:06, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back!!

I've happily removed you from Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. -- œ^™ 15:06, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--Baron Larf 15:44, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]