User talk:Wwoods/Archive 2008

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your move of HMS Amethyst (U16/F116)

What is your reasoning behind this move? The ship at different times carried both pennant numbers and the previous name version was therefore more unambiguous in making it clear they applied to a single ship. Nick Cooper (talk) 11:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

But — as far as I know — we never use multiple designations in an article's title, though of course they belong in the article itself.
"If a ship had several hull numbers in her career, use the best-known (but give all her hull numbers in the lead section, and make redirects from the others): ... If none of several hull numbers is clearly the best-known, use the first: ... It should be noted that European navies reuse pennant numbers, so ships of the same name may have the same pennant numbers; the second and third Sir Galahad, for example. So you may need to use the launch date to disambiguate these."
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Disambiguating ships with the same name
—WWoods (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Emperor's name

Hi,

In the past you took part in a discussion about the name of the emperors of Japan. This discussion has just opened again (once again!). You are free to express your opinion here. Thanks Švitrigaila (talk) 16:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


Battle off Samar section

I'm inclined to agree. Most of what's there was put there before I ever edited the article (or indeed any article). I added some material recently because it seemed to me that otherwise the section was hopelessly unbalanced (e.g there was no reference to the actions of USS 'Hoel' or even any account of her sinking, and there was scarcely any description of the air counterattacks) - so I felt that there either ought to be a lot less in the section, or that there had to be a little more.

I inserted all those sub-headings because it seemed to me the section was long enough to need to be divided up in some way, and that in any case it needed a bit more structure. However, I was reluctant to move or to pull a lot of material which someone else had contributed. There is some stuff there which, speaking personally, I wouldn't have put in any article.

Regards,

Wild Surmise (talk) 22:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Jay Peak resort

Noticed that you removed geolinks from the article Jay Peak Resort. Just wondered what your reasoning was. Most articles seem to have this link. Student7 (talk) 00:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

"Geolinks" used to provide a handy set of external links, giving one-click access to the maps I for one found useful for U.S. locations.
For some reason, it was reduced to a link to the same page you'd get from the coordinate link in the infobox, and now it produces a duplicate link at the top of the page which overlaps the one produced by the infobox. (See the previous version.) Grrr.
So, I've been removing the template when I come across it while editing.
—WWoods (talk) 01:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that. No point in having it twice I suppose.Student7 (talk) 01:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

List of United States Navy ships, B

I've been making some corrections to this page based on information I see in DANFS. I noticed that you had been making changes to the list just recently but my changes have essentially been reverting the ones you made. I didn't notice that til just now. I'm not quite sure what is going on.. do you have a source that I'm not looking at? --Brad (talk) 08:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Those Lend-Lease DEs? No, just DANFS if I recall correctly.
—WWoods (talk) 08:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I wasn't sure why there were Royal Navy ships placed on a list of US Navy ships when using redirect would keep the list integrity intact. I'm having second thoughts about the ones I commented out though, if they're listed in DANFS it seems to mean the Navy had named it but reading the text shows many other things took place. --Brad (talk) 21:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
In hindsight, yes, making redirects is better. It seems to me that some were launched (and presumably named something) and then transferred and renamed, while others were transferred while under construction and never had a US name. And some are designated DE while others are BDE. It's a bit of a muddle. I suppose the DANFS editors were going for completeness, but we can put RN names on the RN list...
There's the related question of ships transferred from the Coast Guard (and its preceding Revenue Service and Lighthouse Service). Were they USSs or did they remain USCGC and USRCs? I've been making the links using those prefixes when the ship history suggests that that's the name the eventual article ought to have.
—WWoods (talk) 21:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
As far as I understand, if the US Navy operated a ship then it can use the USS prefix but like the issue I had on Talk:SS President Cleveland, that ship was never operated by the US Navy and should not use the USS prefix. The others you mention, like USRC, USLHT, may not be "official" prefixes but likely good enough for WP so that we can keep them to their proper assignments. Likely that could be argued as well. --Brad (talk) 06:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The Coast Guard uses them — Google: site:uscg.mil USRC and site:uscg.mil USLHT — so I think they're official enough.
—WWoods (talk) 17:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

New image resizing option in infobox mountain template

Hi there, thought you'd be interested to know that there is now an image resizing option in the mountain infobox template. It should make horizontal photo compositions more manageable--Pgagnon999 (talk) 22:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Gordon Thompson

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Thomas Gordon Thompson, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.navsource.org/archives/09/old/09/5709h.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

DANFS sources

Actually, CSBot knows about the DANFS— if the article is properly attributed. You can do that trivially by placing a {{DANFS}} tag at the bottom of the article which not only attributes the contents but instructs CSBot that the copy is legitimate. — Coren (talk) 22:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, don't mind me. CSBot was confused because you used the template with a parameter and it didn't know about that possibility. Fixed. — Coren (talk) 22:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Future energy development

This is a requested merge that dates back to 2004. The very first comment on the talk page had the edit summary, (Content should be merged with Alternative energy). The final discussion on this topic that it should be merged was over 6 months ago and since then the article has been completely merged into energy development and can now be deleted. 199.125.109.98 (talk) 21:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

um does this user User:199.125.109.98 have the authority to merge articles?
just wondering where the page went?--Sparkygravity (talk) 21:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Anon 199.125.109.* certainly doesn't act like a newbie does he? But whatever his actual identity, there's some justification for his actions: Talk:Future energy development#Merge then Delete. Whether this merge makes sense or not, I don't know. I haven't really considered the matter. If you want to pursue it, I suggest you raise the subject on Talk:Energy development.
—WWoods (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Geolinks-Europe-mountain

A tag has been placed on Template:Geolinks-Europe-mountain requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Naming of Catskill mountain articles

It's not really necessary to include the county as well as the state (or even the state) if there's no other peak by that name in the state or county (I highly doubt there's another Vly Mountain in the U.S, for instance). Slide Mountain is named the way it is because there's another Slide Mountain in the Adirondacks. But New York has no other Hunter Mountain (Alaska does, though). Daniel Case (talk) 18:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

The USGS database includes "Hunter Mountain"s in Arkansas, California, Maine, Oregon, Texas, and Washington, as well as Hunter Mountain (New York). Did you mean Balsam Mountain?
When I did {{Catskill High Peaks}}, I checked all the names in the GNIS, and made the article names as precise as necessary to be unique. Probably some can lose the county name, or even New York, if the other summits aren't ever going to have Wikipedia articles, but I didn't know which those would be.
—WWoods (talk) 19:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Rechecking Bearpen Mountain (Greene County, New York), I see no other "Bearpen Mountain" in New York, though there's a "Bearpen Peak" in Warren County. So that can presumably be moved to Bearpen Mountain (New York). (But there are two "Bearpen Mountain"s in both Macon County and Jackson County, North Carolina!)
—WWoods (talk) 19:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
WP:MOUNTAIN and the other geographical projects prefer county/state names. I really ought to rename North Mountain (Catskills). I defer to what you discovered ... I had no idea we had another Vly (an odd choice of word to name a mountain after ... "Swamp Mountain"?).
I notice an anon (presumably the developer) has added links to the redesigned pages at the new Catskill 3500 Club website (all of which have backlinks here). For a change, this is a mass link addition completely in conformance with WP:EL.
I generally prefer not to create stub articles, to go whole hog, but I think in this case we better serve our readers. At least by keeping them as stubs, I reserve the potential for future DYK hooks since it will be easy to expand fivefold. Daniel Case (talk) 04:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Angie Dickinson

An editor has nominated Angie Dickinson, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angie Dickinson and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Bio

If there's no page link, I'd leave it in; if there is, & somebody's interested why the ship in question is named for him, click the link. (Same goes for subs.) In a paper encyclopedia, I'd agree with you; not here. As for " s", I find it clutters & makes things harder to read in editing; I'm told it functions as a hard space, so in future, I'll leave 'em in. Trekphiler (talk) 02:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Mount Webster (Coos County, New Hampshire)

Hi there, are you okay with me renaming this article back to Mount Webster? I can't find any other mountains sharing this name, and in such cases, the 'simplest' name should normally be used, i.e. plain Mount Webster. Best regards, — BillC talk 14:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, there is another one, in Grafton County.[7] It's smaller, so possibly ignorable.
—WWoods (talk) 01:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Should someone create an article for the smaller mountain, a disambiguation page would cover it. — BillC talk 11:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Need a 1632 hand

FYI

re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sandstein#Gimme_a_break_here.21

Can't believe this! I'm too busy right now for WP, so can you monitor/influence this... hopefully he/she was to lazy to fix the created redlinks... leaving things more or less intact, but I find it hard to think of a 1632 article which didn't/doesn't/shouldn't reference and link to this page! Sheesh! // FrankB 14:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, my bad

Sorry, its only these articles. I'm kinda new to moving articles so I didn't really look it up. I'd appreciate it if you'd merge the history pages, thanks. :) --DIREKTOR (TALK) 06:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

There's just Seven anti-Partisan offensives and that's it. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 07:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done —WWoods (talk) 07:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Venus Equilateral

Hi. Venus Equilateral (collection) — the article on the book collecting the stories — is awfully short, and likely to remain so. It seems to me it'd be better to merge it into Venus Equilateral, in a section on publication history. We could put infoboxes on both the 1947 and 1976 books up at the top.
—WWoods (talk) 01:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I had originally planned to update the existing series article, thinking it was an article on the book when I created the Prime Press page. However, I decided to do a separate article instead. I didn't think a contents list would integrate well with the existing article, which includes all the VE stories. Also, I was worried that the categories would get confusing with both the story and book categories. I think I like them better as separate articles with the appropriate links to each other, but that's merely a personal preference, rather than anything based on a style guide. I don't feel so strongly about it that I'd object if you wanted to merge them.--Rtrace (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Brazilian Navy ships

Category:Brazilian Navy ships, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Bellhalla (talk) 13:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Republic of China Navy ships

Category:Republic of China Navy ships, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Venezuelan Navy ships

Category:Venezuelan Navy ships, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Look What You Started :)

Check out all the plot summaries on the talk page for the Heinlein article. David in DC (talk) 20:35, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:George.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:George.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:George.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Sdrtirs (talk) 21:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Inquiry

Hi, I was wondering if you can tell me how long does a page move poll generally last before the decision is made and the discussion is archived? (And generally how a final decision is reached, as polling is not definitive.) --DIREKTOR (TALK) 02:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


Thank you

Thanks so much for your help reformatting the references in the University of Pittsburgh page. You work is greatly appreciated! Feel free to join our WikiProject if you like:

WikiProject University of Pittsburgh

As a current or past contributor to a Pitt-related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the University of Pittsburgh and the Pitt Panthers. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! CrazyPaco (talk) 18:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Doom of Mandos

I have nominated Doom of Mandos, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doom of Mandos. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 13:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

re: AT / LT re-route

Shall see if I can find out about the probable LT re-route at Pico Peak. My old LT Guide is several years past its best before date. On another topic, in your opinion would it be worth laying claim to this page for WikiProject Trails: High Falls on the Oswegatchie River ? How does one do that (a ref. to the relevant wiki guidelines page would be appreciated) ? Petersent (talk) 21:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Thanks for checking, Tom

It seems to be about a waterfall, but if it's strongly associated with the trails in the area, I guess you could add the {{HikingProject}} banner to the Talk page. You might post a question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hiking Trails.
Thanks for adding those mountain pictures of yours.
—WWoods (talk) 22:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome and thanks for the advice. Unfortunately I don't have a particularly good photo of South Crocker Mountain, they all seem to be decent shots of Crocker. You might want to have a look and swop them around, until a better one comes along. Also look at the one of the Crockers presently on the Sugarloaf page. The High Falls page is indeed primarily about a waterfall, reachable only by canoe or by trail. Shall think about approaching the HikingTrails folks. A propos the GMC's Killington Section was very helpful in clarifying the LT re-route for Pico Peak. It took me a while to notice that I had posted the DEC longitude and latitude on the Carter Notch page. Good catch. However the elevations were taken from the GNIS site, rather than from my maps. The latter have the elevations as you posted them. But what's the objection to the GNIS el. data? Isn't that more "official?"
Petersent (talk) 02:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Image:Crockers.jpg isn't bad, though it looks crooked.
I wondered why the location for Carter Notch was so far off, until I checked the diff and saw what had happened. :-)
'Official' but not reliable for precise elevations in steep terrain. Actually, they say "not official":
"Where do the elevation figures come from?
Elevation figures are not official and do not represent precisely measured or surveyed values. The data are extracted from digital elevation models of the National Elevation Dataset for the given coordinates and may differ from elevations cited in other sources, including those published on USGS topographic maps. Variances between the NED and GNIS elevation data and other sources generally arise from acceptable tolerances, and will be most evident for features such as summits, where precision is of more concern, and where the local relief (rate of change of elevation) may be more prominent. When the elevation figure is of particular note, for example the highest point in the State, then the actual elevation is recorded in the description field of the feature. The elevation figures are sufficiently accurate for most purposes of general information. Efforts are continuously being made to improve the accuracy and resolution of both GNIS and NED data, the results of which will be reflected at both sites."
http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/ --> Frequently Asked Questions
So I take elevations from the topo map. Topozone is gone, but http://mapper.acme.com/ is nice.
—WWoods (talk) 02:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. Image:Crockers.jpg isn't one of mine. Although some of mine have been edited to adjust the horizon or a bit of cropping, there are those that can't be so easily fixed. Tant pis. Petersent (talk) 05:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Archiving talk pages

Please don't archive active talk pages you are not involved in. In the past you archived several recent open discussions on a talk page I was involved in, and today you archived the FAQ at Peak oil, as well as several open discussions. NJGW (talk) 18:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

What FAQ; that section at the beginning? What open discussions?
Somebody needs to weed out that talk page — it's over 300k. Why don't you do it?
—WWoods (talk) 19:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I've done it in the past and I was going to do it again once I got a chance, but then you never go there so what makes you so concerned? Yes, the section at the beginning that looks like a FAQ is in fact a FAQ; and the threads that read "resolved" with a big green check-mark are closed, while those that don't read "resolved" are in fact not "resolved" yet. NJGW (talk) 20:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Turkish Navy ships

Category:Turkish Navy ships, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Country specific nuclear information

Hi, Wwoods. There is a discussion how to organize the country specific nuclear energy information. Your opinion is welcome.Beagel (talk) 19:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Why do you think John Pilger is a "a bit of a nut"? The Guardian is a most credible newspaper (traditionally read by US presidents even) and Pilger is an award winning journalist. He is clearly at least a usable source, and the facts he relates on the reporting of Hiroshima/Nagasaki can be sourced elsewhere too. --Matt Lewis (talk) 00:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

  • "...the mythology of the ultimate "good war", ... has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, ..."
  • "... In waging their bogus "war on terror", the present governments in Washington and London have declared they are prepared to make "pre-emptive" nuclear strikes against non-nuclear states. ..."
  • "... the real threat remains almost unmentionable in western establishment circles and therefore in the media. There is only one rampant nuclear power in the Middle East and that is Israel. ... In defiance of UN resolutions, Israel is today clearly itching to attack Iran, ..."
  • "... Radovan Karadzic stands in the dock, but Sharon and Olmert, Bush and Blair do not. Why not? ..."
  • "... He is particularly opposed to many aspects of United States foreign policy, which he regards as being driven by a largely imperialist agenda."
  • "... Pilger ascribed blame for the 2005 London bombings that took place the same month to Blair, ..."
  • "Pilger is a supporter of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. ..."
—WWoods (talk) 01:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Short and sweet, eh? Well you've made your own politics clear here, but I guessed them anyway by your response to me in Hiroshima/Nagasaki. If you call "nuts" the opinion that 'US foreign policy is based on an imperialist agenda', I wouldn't come to Europe, that's all I say - you might get a bit of a shock.

It's very kind of you to spend your time looking after the Hiroshima/Nagasaki article, by the way. I'm sure the families and crippled descendents of those who died there would be so grateful to you. If only there were more people like you in the world! Make sure you keep all that unwanted stuff out, now! We don't want any baggy article offending their memory do we. Lets keep it short and sweet, eh? --Matt Lewis (talk) 02:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your question on my Talk page, Yes, you did miss something, but it was an understandable oversight, given the cantilevered indirection in my referencing (my laziness, sorry). I'll cop to being maybe half-wrong here, if not more. See Richard B. Frank's Weekly Standard article, where he writes

Collectively, the missing information is known as The Ultra Secret of World War II (after the title of a breakthrough book by Frederick William Winterbotham published in 1974).

It was Winterbotham I was referring to, not Frank, when I said that the Weekly Standard article was based on a book whose author was of doubtful reliability. Where I almost certainly erred, however, was in saying that Frank's article was based almost entirely on Winterbotham's book. Actually, that book doesn't appear to have enough scope to cover the supposed "millions" of intelligence intercepts in the Pacific theater (was it possible for the Japanese to have sent millions of messages in the time left to fight after their codes were broken?) However, Winterbotham's is just about the only source Frank mentions in the Weekly Standard article (troubling enough in itself, given the questions about Winterbotham's account), so a hasty reading led me to conclude it was the only source Frank relied on to make his case that the Japanese would never have surrendered. Color me careless. But at least not as careless as some, right? ;-) Yakushima (talk) 03:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


Deletion

I don't know if you enjoy World Wrestling Entertainment, but please check WWE Figures, you'll agree it's a terrible acticle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChuckCoke (talk • contribs) 17:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Royal R. Ingersoll II

A tag has been placed on Royal R. Ingersoll II requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Adrianwn (talk) 09:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Key Col determination for mountains??

How are you determining key col elevations?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calzarette (talk • contribs) 03:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Calzarette. Prominence — as a technical term — is measured from the summit down to the lowest contour that encircles that summit and no higher summit. Or equivalently, down to the lowest col on the ridgeline leading to a higher peak. The latter definition is what you use when you're trying to figure prominence from the topo map. The network of ridge lines is sort of the inverse of the network of rivers. Put your hand on the table with the fingers spread out — the fingers are the ridge lines, which connect at the back of the hand; the spaces between the fingers are the river valleys, connecting at the sea. See "topographic prominence" for a much longer explanation.
Prominence is most useful for deciding whether or not a particular peak is just an outcropping or a subpeak of a higher summit, or it deserves to be considered a hill or mountain in its own right. However the definition can be extended to all peaks — and has been. It may seem a little silly to measure the height of a mountain relative to a place which may be thousands of miles away; the advantage is that it's an objective measure, which can be determined as precisely as the available surveys allow, without the need for subjective decisions about what elevation to use for the "base" of a mountain.
For a simple example, consider Sugarloaf Knob (see map). The ridge line runs ESE over a couple of bumps and then NE up to the top of Laurel Hill. The prominence is not the distance down to the river, but the distance down to the lowest dip — which happens to be the first. The height of the peak is 2670±10 and the elevation of the key col is 2430±10, so the prominence is 240±20 feet.
Blue Knob and Wills Mountain were a lot harder, but I checked http://www.peaklist.org/ and found this map of 21 known peaks in Pennsylvania with over 1000 feet of prominence and the ridge lines connecting them. With that for a guide, I think I found the key cols, from which I computed the prominence values. I don't think this is Original Research — the maps have been published, even if those numbers haven't. I realized I might of course have made a mistake, which is why I included the locations I found.
Blue Knob didn't make the cut because the lowest dip on the ridge line is only ~800 feet below its summit elevation. Wills may have the highest prominence in the state, though I doubt it. I figured it to be 1,440±20, while Peakbagger says that Shade Mtn. has 1,460±20.
For doing groups of articles, I've found it helpful to use a fill-in-the-blank template such as User:Wwoods/Mountain page template, so I don't have to type it all in each time. It currently has the Catskills footer because that's the last bunch I did. Feel free to copy it, if you like.
—WWoods (talk) 06:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you much!

I appreciate you taking time to clarify the definitions. I just want the information to be as accurate as possible, I apologize for the confusion. I beleive I have a better understanding now. Thanks for also editing these pages and making them better. jcalz (talk) 16:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Oil shale economics

Hi, Wwoods. There is an attempt to give a boost to the Oil shale economics article. As you contributed to the earlier version (then part of the Oil shale of the article and participated in the relevant discussion, you may be interested to participate. The discussion is going on here. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 14:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Vessel Templates

see User:Bluenorway

Im told by naval authorities that the vessels are to be named their earliest public name, any prior identies (secret or code names) should redirect to the vessel's first official name... For example, the SS Norway goes to the original SS France and vessel USNS Vandenberg goes to i dont remember, 1945

The same applies to Export Courier as listed by Sun as the production name for Exporters company.

Export Courier is not USNS

Also obviously categories and templates need to be established for all of these and standardized.

User_talk:Bluenorway

Bluenorway (talk) 16:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Planned unprotection of Patriot (American Revolution)

I recently stumbled upon Patriot (American Revolution), and noticed it had been semi-protected. As I didn't see anything on the talk page supporting a long-term protection, I plan to unprotect the page in the near future. As you were the admin who placed the article under semi-protection in November 2007, with a note that it was to prevent vandalism, I thought I'd drop you a little note about my planned action, and ask if you'd care to discuss the article at Talk:Patriot (American Revolution). Thanks, Gentgeen (talk) 12:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, let's see what happens. —WWoods (talk) 15:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Ward.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Ward.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Ward.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 20:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:Kino.jpg

Image:Kino.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Eusebio Francisco Kino bronze by Suzanne Silvercruys.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Eusebio Francisco Kino bronze by Suzanne Silvercruys.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Sabin.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Sabin.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Sabin.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 20:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

coord parameters

I notice you are on a string of great edits, but occasionally I see an article you've just edited show up in category:Coord template needing repair. For example, this edit you just made assumes that {{coord}} has a scale parameter. It does—kind of—if you use this format. If that seems perplexing, see a related discussion on my talk page. Thanks, —EncMstr (talk) 22:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Oops! :-( —WWoods (talk) 23:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

n|60->n+1|0

Thanks for the clean up! Much appreciated. I just figured out how to get a vim script to do it. —EncMstr (talk) 20:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Mind the roll-over cases, 19->20 and 49->50. (It's rather suspicious that there aren't any |9|60|, |29|60|, etc. It seems like the original data set was rounded off somehow.)
—WWoods (talk) 20:46, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Of course. The final script is:
%s/0|60|E/1|0|E/
%s/1|60|E/2|0|E/
%s/2|60|E/3|0|E/
%s/3|60|E/4|0|E/
%s/4|60|E/5|0|E/
%s/5|60|E/6|0|E/
%s/6|60|E/7|0|E/
%s/7|60|E/8|0|E/
%s/8|60|E/9|0|E/
%s/0|60|N/1|0|N/
%s/1|60|N/2|0|N/
%s/2|60|N/3|0|N/
%s/3|60|N/4|0|N/
%s/4|60|N/5|0|N/
%s/5|60|N/6|0|N/
%s/6|60|N/7|0|N/
%s/7|60|N/8|0|N/
%s/8|60|N/9|0|N/
%s/|9|60|N/|10|0|N/
%s/|19|60|N/|20|0|N/
%s/|29|60|N/|30|0|N/
%s/|39|60|N/|40|0|N/
%s/|49|60|N/|50|0|N/
%s/|9|60|E/|10|0|E/
%s/|19|60|E/|20|0|E/
%s/|29|60|E/|30|0|E/
%s/|39|60|E/|40|0|E/
%s/|49|60|E/|50|0|E/
Brutish, but effective. —EncMstr (talk) 20:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

55th World Science Fiction Convention

I tagged 55th World Science Fiction Convention as unreferenced and original research. Do you have the references you used to create the first major edit for this article handy? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 16:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Uh, aside from those listed in "External links", I don't think there were any. But the third is now a dead link, replaced by http://www.thehugoawards.org/?page_id=23.
—WWoods (talk) 06:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Queen's Chapel

Thanks for fixing up my coords edit to Queen's Chapel, and in the process showing me how to do what I had wanted to do in the first place.Epanalepsis (talk) 13:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Reply: Allirahu

I'm sorry, I don't know the exact coordinates to Allirahu. I created that article some time ago and do not exactly recall the original information. - James.S (talk • contribs) 17:33, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you so very much! I appreciate your guidance and help.Capitalismojo (talk) 21:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Coords in EL sections

The point of including the Mapit in the ELs is to have the coords etc. equally available at the bottom of the page, which is virtually universal for CDPs and most types of municipalities in the USA (New England towns being a significant exception). Having this link has been removed without consensus in the standard US city layout, which I've not gotten around to contesting yet, but it's the standard nonetheless. Anyway, even if you decide that this should trump longstanding USCITY consensus and gain broad support for removing them, you should still remove the EL header :-) Nyttend (talk) 01:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the point. Back in the day, Mapit and Geolinks provided a handy one-click access to the maps I wanted to look at, but now it's just another link to the geohack page already available from (A) the link at the top of the page, (B) the infobox, and often (C) the link in the text.
(And it's in decimal degrees, which isn't usually my preference.)
—WWoods (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Coords help

Thanks for your help with the Coords feature, I plan to use it extesively where I can. (And now I know why signing signatures on Talk pages is important...) --smadge1 (talk) 22:06, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Oops. :-( —WWoods (talk) 22:53, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again for your help, I like this geotagging business. There still seems to be issues with style and page layouts (ie, each WikiProject have different ways of formatting and page placement...) arghh. For the Australian coords I've done, I've put it under the Postcode in the Location Box. --smadge1 (talk) 22:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Scout Moor Wind Farm

Hi, a recent edit you made to this article has a couple of us scratching our heads. Two points: where's the source you used to get the figure for capacity factor, and what does it mean? The discussion is here (second half of the section). Happy editing. Nev1 (talk) 13:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Unrelated coords question

Saw this edit, and I was curious: what's the source for changing the coords? Nyttend (talk) 04:00, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I was trying to locate the train station, Waterbury (Amtrak station), and found the coordinates for Waterbury, Vermont were 44°21′28″N 72°44′27″W / 44.35778°N 72.74083°W / 44.35778; -72.74083 in the infobox and 44°23′31″N 72°44′58″W / 44.39194°N 72.74944°W / 44.39194; -72.74944 at the bottom. Neither looked good. I changed Waterbury to 44°20′15″N 72°45′20″W / 44.33750°N 72.75556°W / 44.33750; -72.75556. I assumed that Waterbury (village), Vermont was "Waterbury Center", but checking, its location is given as 44°20′23″N 72°45′1″W / 44.33972°N 72.75028°W / 44.33972; -72.75028, so maybe it's the other way around?
—WWoods (talk) 07:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Fjords in Canada

Thanks for fixing that. I guess I made one too many "search & replaces". Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 20:02, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Balmaclellan Coords

You corrected the coordinates for Balmaclellan to much more accurate ones. However, I would move the center maybe 25m north to the smithy, but others might disagree and prefer to move it 25m west to the store. Where did you get these coordinates? Please respond on my talk. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 02:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. No, I don't have anything better. I was just doing a Google search like "townname coordinates", getting a result from somewhere like wikimapia, and checking that it seemed to be roughly in the right place. You have a more accurate approach. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Missing archive?

At this edit you say you archived the talk, but I can't seem to access the archive. Am I missing something?LeadSongDog (talk) 04:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

The page got moved from Tar sands to Oil sands, but the archive page was left behind; I've just moved it.
—WWoods (talk) 05:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Thx. LeadSongDog (talk) 06:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:Morton o.jpg

Image:Morton o.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:OHP Morton, by Charles Henry Niehaus.JPG. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:OHP Morton, by Charles Henry Niehaus.JPG]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:M000969.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:M000969.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Wwoods. You have new messages at Fabrictramp's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WZBK

They may be wrong, but we use the coordinates on the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) website. What they use, is what we put down, regardless if it is technically wrong. This isn't an intentional mistake, it is something we had to copy from the FCC. - NeutralHomer • Talk • October 19, 2008 @ 11:59

Your protection of Nuclear power

Heyo. I noticed on my watchlist today that you protected Nuclear power indefinitely for "excessive vandalism". A review of the article history though shows only one vandalism edit in the last three days. Does this rise to the level of excessive vandalism requiring semiprotection? Would you perhaps reconsider your decision and unprotect the article? Cheers, HiDrNick! 20:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Checking the edit history, I saw two instances of vandalism already today, and almost nothing but vandalism & reversion for the last 50 edits. It seems like a lot to me, though maybe I should have put a expiration on the protection.
—WWoods (talk) 20:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
A review of the IP edits for the last three days shows a test edit that was self reverted, a edit that is not vandalism, reverted, with some edit warring but still not vandalism. Finally we see some real vandalism (see also m:GAY), followed by an unhelpful edit that is still not vandalism. Can we perhaps compromise and set an expiration so that at some point that article can return to its rightful "everyone can edit" status? HiDrNick! 22:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
This topic, like Oil sands, seems to attract the professional advocacy groups working as dynamic IP editors, presumably to evade identification as such. I'd be happy to see a lengthy span of protection. It might persuade some of them to register.LeadSongDog (talk) 13:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Coords question

Can you explain this statement: "Coords need to be in the title, because that makes them visible to Google Maps". You made this on WP:GEO, but I see no explanation of why this is true. Maury Markowitz (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

http://earth.google.com/userguide/v4/geoweb_faq.html
How do I get my Wikipedia article to show up in the Google Earth Geographic Web layer?
You must geotag the article. The simplest way to do this is to use the {{coord}} template. ... with the title keyword ... Using display=title indicates that the coordinates explicitly refer to the location of the title article, rather than another geographic location that may appear in the article text.
Displaying with the title attribute also makes the coords appear at the top of the Wikipedia page. Some infobox templates, including {{Infobox Settlement}}, include an optional invocation of coord — just fill in the parameters such as lat_d=, long_d=, etc.
—WWoods (talk) 18:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

So is there any reason Google couldn't have another tag that did the same thing? Perhaps a "main" tag, or similar? Is there someone at Google we could ask? Maury Markowitz (talk) 03:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I've no idea. You might ask on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates. What's your objection to using the title tag?
—WWoods (talk) 04:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
The problem is that people are using TITLE to make Google work, but really they just want an inline. This is particularly frustrating in the case of infoboxes, because TITLE displays at the top of the area where the box will be drawn, pushing it down and upsetting the layout. Worse, you end up with exactly the same coord set in two places, separated by a few lines. It looks bad, and should be fixed. Maury Markowitz (talk) 22:15, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wwoods/Archive_2008&oldid=1140956261"