User talk:Swid/Archive3

Dakota/Nebraska

I'm finally doing some much-needed maintenance on Territorial evolution of the United States, and you mentioned the bit about Dakota Territory losing a little bit of land to Nebraska. Would you happen to have any idea when in 1882 this happened? Right now it's the only unsure date in the article. --Golbez 11:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

March 28, 1882 – Swid ^{(talk | edits)} 13:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Woo, thanks :) --Golbez 22:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Hebrides

I imagine some discussion somewhere has led to a preference for the change you made to this template. Can you direct me to an explanation somewhere of how it works and why it is preferred? Thanks, Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

All you need to know about Navigation-style templates can be found here. – Swid ^{(talk | edits)} 13:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

USRD Inactivity check and news report

Hello, Swid. We had a few urgent matters to communicate to you:

1. Please update your information at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Participants, our new centralized participant list. Those who have not done so by October 20th will be removed.
2. There are important discussions taking place at WT:USRD relating to whether WP:USRD, WP:HWY, or the state projects should hold the "power" in the roads projects.

Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 23:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Messed up national newspaper listing/template

Unwittingly I have somehow messed up all the state categories on newspapers by messing with <three braces><state><three braces> in Vermont listing of newspapers]. Now all papers are listed for each state. Gulp! Help! What the heck happened? I was not aware of messing with a template directly though I DID get a funny message when I tried to edit the section which contained the category.
While ultimately, this can be corrected by reverting, how the heck can I add a category to this section without interfering with a template? Student7 02:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

FWIW, I went ahead and fixed it to add the category you wanted. – Swid ^{(talk · edits)} 02:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

USRD inactivity notification

You have been declared inactive at USRD. If this is in error, feel free to restore yourself to the list, but only if you are truly active at USRD. Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 21:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about putting the new haplogroups out there just yet

I did it because it's very hard to edit the table / template, and I still haven't gotten it right. Of course when the new tree comes out we can just revert back to it.

You might also be interested in the Template:Y-DNA Phylogenetic Tree that I created,l which isn't linked to any pages either (and therefore won't come up in searches). I only know about some parts of the new tree, but in a day or two I'll have the rest and get to work on the remaining updates. This way it'll be ready right when the paper gets published, even before ISOGG updates their tree, so people can immediately refer to it.

BTW, the same tree with the SNPs listed with links to their refSNP / UniSTS IDs in GenBank, and one with a kind of "translation table" / "formerly called" would be excellent as well.

Oh, and you found the Y-Haplogroup userbox that I created ...

Archaeogenetics 20:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Dailyer Nebraskan

Well, I guess if you don't believe that the Dailyer Nebraskan is a group at UNL here is the link to student involvement. http://einvolvement.unl.edu/index.php?searchByName=t

We haven't been able to print a first copy since the group started this year but hope to have one published by the end of this fall semester. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waolson2176 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

That's fine and all (I found that link earlier, as it was one of only 4 results in an Internet search), but just because something exists, it doesn't mean that automatically qualifies it for inclusion in Wikipedia. For instance, do all the 300+ student organizations deserve mention? I suggest that you review Wikipedia's notability guidelines and What Wikipedia is not before pursuing the matter further. – Swid ^{(talk · edits)} 06:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Spade Ranch, Nebraska

Swid, is this one really OR, or just poor citations? I'm afraid the OR tag reduces the validity of the article. Could the bad cite tag just be moved to the top and the OR dropped? • Freechild'sup? 02:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I tagged it OR because of reference 4 — "Information was obtained from interview with Bret Bixby". It's unfortunate, because it has become a really good article and something I'd like to see nominated for DYK when it's cleaned up. I'll leave a message with Sandhiller and see if the information that was derived from a personal interview can be found elsewhere, or barring that, simply deleted. – Swid ^{(talk · edits)} 05:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Swid, I really appreciate the advice. My references list will be revised asap. I will have the page polished up completely in the next couple of days. I have tons of information still to add. I welcome any advice you have. Thank you very much Sandhiller

Your DYK nomination for Spade Ranch, Nebraska was successful

Did you know? was updated. On November 20, 2007, a fact from the article Spade Ranch, Nebraska, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 22:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 4 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nebraska wine, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 03:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

HELP

The changes you made to Template:Celtic mythology topics are causing some problems. It's not responding to the old code for choosing whether it displays as collapsed or uncollapsed. It's a big-ass template, and I don't want to use it unless we can choose a collapsed state. Please set the code so this is an option, or tell me (or someone) how to do it, or I'm going to have to revert it. I appreciate all the work you put into it, but I don't want to use it if it's going to always display at practically the size of the completely uncollapsed version. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've looked it over again and I do think what you did is an improvement. The thing is so huge, I hadn't uncollapsed it in a long time, and the changes you made still result in a less overwhelming field, even when uncollapsed. But I assume that since it can be collapsed manually, there's got to be some way to choose the collapsed state as default, whether on the template itself or on the pages that use it. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

At present, that template doesn't support being fully collapsed. Unfortunately, I don't have enough knowledge of template syntax to add the {{state|}} functionality it. However, I'm sure you can find someone who has that knowledge. – Swid ^{(talk · edits)} 01:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Nebraska Portal

You seem to be one of the only currently active WP:NEB participants, and so I thought to ask your opinion upon this box-style Nebraska portal I made. Temperal^{talk and matrix?} 18:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Changing it to the official color of Nebraska is something I hadn't thought of... thanks. I'll move it to the portal namespace now.Nousernamesleft^{talk and matrix?} 22:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Unlofficialseal.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Unlofficialseal.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

rollback

I have granted rollback rights to your account, because after a review of some of your contributions it appears that we can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended use of reverting vandalism: and believe you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Rollback feature and Rollback school. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Cheers, NoSeptember 19:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Clarification: Lisco or Cisco?

Hey, Swid, do you know anything about Lisco/Cisco? An editor recently moved "Lisco" to "Cisco" because that's apparently what the Census Bureau calls it, though all the other sources I was able to quickly check called it Lisco. If you happen to know what's going on, perhaps you could add a couple comments to Talk:Cisco, Nebraska#Lisco or Cisco?. —Bkell (talk) 00:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

WikProject:Genetic History - great job!

I just signed up at the sandbox WikiProject page and I want to say that you have done a great job. Hopefully in few days we will have the project working in full swing.

As an advance for that leadership effort:

		The WikiProject Barnstar
		For your decisive leadership in developing the much needed Genetic History WikiProject Sugaar (talk) 04:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

You can place it in your main page as soon the project exists fromally, what you will find out because the red link above will become blue (or at least should). :)

--Sugaar (talk) 04:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

UK legislation templates

Hi Swid! I responded to/ started debate on your point at Template talk:UK legislation.Cutler (talk) 22:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Nathaniel Higginson

I've offered a suggestion on the categorization of Nathaniel Higginson. Do drop in with your opinions. Thank you :-) -Ravichandar 11:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Omaha

Hey Swid. Since you've contributed so much to the articles about Omaha, I want to invite you to join me in founding Wikipedia:WikiProject Omaha. According to the guidelines there should be at least five people interested in the in project before launching it, and you would be one of the five most active editors throughout the 100s of Omaha-related articles. Please reply on talk page whether or not you're interested. Thanks. • Freechild'sup? 06:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

With support from a number of editors, WikiProject Omaha is now live. Feel free to add your name to the list of editors and to add one of the spiffy templates to your user page. There is a list of open tasks and a resource list you can contribute to or help with, as well! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to working with you to make WikiProject Omaha a success. • Freechild'sup? 17:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Haplogroup CT (Y-DNA)

Could you provide sources for your move of CR to CT? As it stands, the only source is the ISOGG site, that does not mention this important change of nomenclature and tree-structure at all (and a paper mostly on Indian mtDNA that looks totally irrelevant). --Sugaar (talk) 23:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, there aren't any (yet). The haplogroup nomenclature changes introduced by the Karafet et al. paper hasn't been integrated into the ISOGG tree (though I hear rumor that the ISOGG tree will be updated "real soon now").

The naming of haplogroups where a clade exists but it has no known living members (BT, CT, DE, CF, IJ, NO) was an innovation created by the ISOGG and was only been partially adopted by the Karafet paper; it explicitly lists DE and NO, but does not directly mark BT, CT, CF, and IJ, even though the latter four clearly exist cladistically.

I've fallen into the uncomfortable position of defending something that clearly exists, but cannot (yet) provide sources for. The changes are going to be fast and furious during the next few years, and it's going to be very difficult to stay on top of things. – Swid ^{(talk · edits)} 00:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)