This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

←

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

→

Archive 30

I have nominated the article for FAC, my first one. Here is the link if you wanna leave comments. :) -- Frankie _talk 15:50, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

FrB.TG, I promise to look at this as soon as I can. -- West Virginian (talk) 02:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

If you are going to keep reverting my changes, would you please explain yourself on the talk page? There is no lack of consensus where nobody has stated any opposition in the month since I proposed the change. Toohool ( talk) 17:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Toohool, the existing standard on Wikipedia for featured lists of colleges utilizes the pre-existing criteria set forth by the United States Department of Education and the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education for identifying individual post-secondary institutions. The Middle States Commission on Higher Education seems to accredit each of the campuses separately, as is evident in this database. So those are three reputable sources which list the campuses as separate post-secondary institutions. The MSCHE even gives each institution its own "Institution Code." Therefore, since three very credible sources list the institutions as being independent, we will list them independently from one another here. If necessary, we can take this matter to Wikipedia:Mediation Committee. -- West Virginian (talk) 18:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I just want to let you know I'll be glad to go through the articles for which you've requested a copy-edit at GOCE Requests after I finish the India House article tomorrow, if nobody else claims them before then. Corinne ( talk) 03:28, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, thank you for wanting to take these on! I hope no one snags them up in the meantime; and I hope you like them when you do! -- West Virginian (talk) 03:35, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Webster Sycamore you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chhe -- Chhe ( talk) 08:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi WV, I saw the comment you pinged me to at the Mantis FAC, and I thought I should point out that alt text is a bit of a hot potato at FAC. On the one hand, it is part of the MOS, and so is theoretically required for FA-level articles. On the other hand, though, it was previously explicitly included in the criteria, but was removed several years ago after extensive discussion, so many editors who were around for that will argue that it isn't required. Just FYI. Nikkimaria ( talk) 16:08, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Nikkimaria, I wasn't aware of the backstory, so I appreciate you bringing it to my attention. I'll be more mindful of it in the future, and I wish I had checked my inbox before submitting my most recent review; so please disregard it. Thank you for always keeping me in the loop--I always value your guidance! -- West Virginian (talk) 16:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

The article Webster Sycamore you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Webster Sycamore for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Chhe ( talk) 01:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, West Virginian! What is this template here for? Am I supposed to type between the no-wiki template ends? Why? (It's a bit annoying to have to look at pink text and see the final no-wiki moving. After I clicked on Preview to see how it looked, I see that none of my formatting -- paragraphs, links, etc. showed up, so I took away the no-wiki things.) Well, I just finished copy-editing Confederate Memorial (Romney, West Virginia). It was quite interesting and, of course, quite well written as it was. I just made a few small edits. Hope you approve. If you wonder about any of them, please ask. I have just a few really minor concerns:

Corinne, I have no idea what you're talking about regarding a template, and pink text, and no-wiki moving, etc. I still edit Wikipedia using the old interface, so perhaps this is an issue with the new editing interface? There is a template on this page for the gray background, perhaps that is causing the issue with the new editing interface. As for the copyedit, thank you so incredibly much for your timely attention to my GOCE request, as always! Your copyedits are greatly appreciated. I'll be responding to your comments below as soon as possible within a day or so! -- West Virginian (talk) 19:45, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, I promise I have not forgotten about your edits to the Confederate Memorial article. I will be busy over the next few days, but I promise to address your below comments and suggestions as soon as I can! The Webster Sycamore debacle has taken most of my available time. Thank you for your all continued copyedits and reviews! You know I continue to rely upon them, as always! :) -- West Virginian (talk) 19:29, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

1) In the last paragraph of the lead, you have this sentence:

• The list of 125 names engraved on the monument consists of four captains, seven lieutenants...

Do you really like "consists of"? I would prefer "includes".

2) In the section Confederate Memorial (Romney, West Virginia)#Design selection you have this sentence:

• By June 6, 1867, the Confederate Memorial Association had raised the necessary funds and proceeded to select the design, taking into account input from Confederate veterans and others across Hampshire County.

The sentence is grammatically correct, and flows well, but I find the word "input" jarring. I know it is a common, modern word (and there are few, if any, synonyms so it has become common for a reason), but it has the feeling of computer jargon. I'm wondering whether you would consider searching for a way to say the same thing but in a more elegant way.

• proceeded to select the design, taking into account the opinions of...

• proceeded to select the design, inviting and considering the opinions of...

or something else.

3) In the middle of the first paragraph in Confederate Memorial (Romney, West Virginia)#Construction, you have this sentence:

• According to United Daughters of the Confederacy historian Mary Bell Foote, the words "Southern Rights" were initially omitted from the end of the memorial's inscription during its fabrication due to the "bitter" feelings in Baltimore following the American Civil War, and Federal statutes banning such monuments.

I stopped at "bitter". It threw me off. I thought Baltimore was in a southern state, so I wondered why the word would be in quotation marks, as if the feelings in the city were not really bitter. Only much later did I realize that it was just a quote from the historian. I wonder if there is a way to make it so the chance of interpreting the quotation marks around the word as "not really that" are minimized. Perhaps quoting a bit more than one word, perhaps incorporating the quote in a bit longer paraphrase from the historian, or perhaps not putting the word in quotation marks at all. Or have I misunderstood something, perhaps based on my ignorance of the history of that era?

Corinne, I've incorporated the suggestions from 1 and 2, and will have to go back to the hardcopy source to answer 3. While Maryland was a Southern state, its government went with the Union, even though its people were divided. Following the war, Maryland and West Virginia had harsh laws that disenfranchised former Confederates and Confederate sympathizers, and prohibited public demonstration of support for the former Confederate cause. For those reasons, the residents of Romney were cautious, and decided to have the controversial wording etched once it was in Romney. I will find more of the quote later today when I have access to my book. -- West Virginian (talk) 17:24, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

4) In the second paragraph of the section Confederate Memorial (Romney, West Virginia)#Location and design, you have this sentence:

• The structure's pedestal consists of two major stylized component blocks of white marble, topped by a sculpture of a cloth draped urn.

I wonder about this phrase, "two major stylized component blocks of white marble".

(a) I wonder whether you need the word "component" since you have already said the pedestal consists of two...blocks".

(b) I wonder about the use of the word "stylized" to describe blocks of marble. Did you get this word from a source? Usually, the word "stylized" refers to an object whose design has been modified from the original natural, or real, look, like the stylized antlers in the deer in the upper right corner in this image of Scythian art:

.

See [1] and [2]

If you got this from a source, then I suppose the word is being used to say that the blocks had some design elements added to them so that they are no longer simple blocks of stone. But in the picture, the two blocks really look like blocks of marble. They've just had some carving done on the sides. Does that make it stylized? I don't know. Corinne ( talk) 02:27, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

I used stylized as it was used in the sources, and I've removed component as I agree that the sentence reads better without it. -- West Virginian (talk) 17:24, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

P.S. I just marked your request for a copy-edit "Done", and in the process I re-read your original request. I had read the captions. I wondered why each one had an alternate caption. Is that standard procedure? I'll take another look at the article and the captions tomorrow. In the meantime, I added the "Working" template to your other request. Corinne ( talk) 02:51, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, thank you for another stellar review. I will look up the "bitter" quote and will elaborate as soon as is possible. Thanks again! -- West Virginian (talk) 17:24, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I just finished reading Webster Sycamore. Another interesting article. Hardly any errors. I changed "infeasible" to "not feasible" twice, but then looked it up in Wiktionary out of curiosity. [3] (See the antonyms.) Feel free to change it back if you wish. Corinne ( talk) 22:13, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

I was puzzled by one thing:

The first sentence of the second paragraph in the section Webster Sycamore#Dimensions, age, and recognition is the following sentence (I've highlighted some words in bold):

• In 1955, the tree's circumference at breast height, when measured 4.5 feet (1.4 m) from the ground, was 24 feet 8 inches (7.52 m).

The first sentence of the fifth paragraph in that same section is:

• According to official measurements in 1963, the diameter at breast height of the Webster Sycamore, when measured 4.5 feet (1.4 m) from the ground, was more than 7 feet (2.1 m) and its circumference measured 23 feet (7.0 m).

Did the tree shrink? Corinne ( talk) 22:22, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, to appease another editor, I made some further adjustments to the article by removing some unnecessary content so please take a look and let me know if my edits look alright. I wanted to seek your guidance about how to deal with the difference in measurements in the text, as the earlier measurements of the tree were a bit larger. Do you have any suggestions for how to handle this difference in the prose, or with a footnote? I wanted both figures to be included since I wasn't able to judge which one was correct. Thanks again for your amazing and thorough copyedit! -- West Virginian (talk) 19:02, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

I see now that there are three different measurements of the circumference:

1) In the lead, and in the sixth paragraph in "Dimensions, age, and recognition": 25.75 feet (2002, 2011)

2) In the second paragraph of "Dimensions, age, and recognition": 24 feet 8 inches (1955)

3) In the fourth paragraph of "Dimensions, Age, and recognition": 23 feet (1963)

So it seems that the tree's circumference went from 24 feet 8 inches in 1955, to 23 feet in 1963, to 25.75 feet in 2002/2011. We cannot say that the tree grew either gradually bigger or gradually smaller during those years. I think the reason for the differences must be in the height from the ground at which the tree was measured, which was perhaps not as precise as it might be today. I'm wondering whether it might be a good idea to put all three measurements (including the diameter, etc.) in one paragraph, to show that there are differences, and so as not to confuse the reader. Corinne ( talk) 22:50, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, I reorganized the section a bit and caveated the measurements by mentioning the differences in circumference. Please take a look and feel free to edit as necessary. I truly appreciate all your help and support throughout this process! -- West Virginian (talk) 19:28, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I re-worded a bit. Thanks for your kind words. It's a pleasure to help. :) Corinne ( talk) 23:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, Thank you! I think the issues with the article have all been resolved *fingers crossed* -- West Virginian (talk) 17:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I didn't want to remove it without touching base with you first (since you have your hands full with that page as it is :-)), but I've never seen a GOCE copyedit on a list of article milestones; that list is primarily for GA, FA and similar, and an article may receive several copyedits over the years. {{ GOCE}} (which has parameters for multiple copyedits) should suffice. Good luck and all the best, Mini apolis 00:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Miniapolis, thank you for your message and for consulting me about this matter. As you have probably noticed by now, I include the GOCE review as a milestone in all the articles that I've had passed to GA and FA because I consider it another seal of approval. That way, a user can see not only the certification benchmarks reached by an article, but also the copyediting benchmarks, as I hold GOCE in high esteem. I hope you'll permit me to continue including GOCE copyedits in the histories of my articles, so readers know that GOCE copyeditors had a hand in the article. I also find this to be more streamlined, and less clunky than the stand-alone user boxes. Miniapolis, I also wanted to take this opportunity to thank you for your support and contributions during this week's ordeal--they are greatly appreciated! -- West Virginian (talk) 14:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

No problem; I showed up because I thought Chhe hadn't seen that Corinne was working on the page on WP:GOCE/REQ. I make no rules around here (or anywhere else, for that matter), and you're right that the GOCE note in an article's milestones is less clunky than the box (which is basically a plug for the GOCE :-)). The important thing is that GA and FA reviewers know the article has been copyedited. Good luck and all the best, Mini apolis 23:30, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alexander W. Monroe you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Johanna -- Johanna ( talk) 02:41, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Please tell me about class=GA and class=FA articles such as Talk:Mary Margaret O'Reilly. Is the article reviewed, and not the talk page? As you can see, I have revised the WikiProject templates and added a template to the O'Reilly article featured today.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 19:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

On 15 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Webster Sycamore, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that West Virginia's largest American sycamore, the Webster Sycamore, survived an arson attack and inspired a proposed name for the state's health insurance marketplace? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Webster Sycamore. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 02:03, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Anotherclown and Sturmvogel 66 on war in the air and at sea Review essay: Auntieruth55 on the French Revolutionary Wars Op-ed: TomStar81 on the entry of Bulgaria in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

On 17 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dwarka, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Dwarakadhisa Temple (pictured), a five storied edifice in Dwarka, has a 78-metre (256 ft) spire on which is hoisted a large flag with symbols of the sun and moon? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dwarka. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass ( talk) 01:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Your GA review helped this DYK to go through. Thanks. I have two very imporatan articles posted on GAN - Puri, one of the four great Dhams of Hindu religion and the other is Jokhang the holiest Buddhist shrine in Lhasa, Tibet for the Tibetans. If you have time kindly consider reviewing them. Nvvchar. 01:28, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Nvvchar, I apologize for not seeing your message sooner! Your incredible hard work got this article to GA and DYK; although I was happy to participate in polishing the article up a bit! When time allows, I will take on one of your GA nominations for review, as I always enjoy reviewing your articles illustrating Indian cities and historic places of interest. I promise to get to one soon! -- West Virginian (talk) 23:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

The article Mingo Oak you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mingo Oak for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 00:42, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, West Virginian - I've been watching the recent edits to Literary Hall. I'd like to point out a few things and let you decide what you want to do, if anything.

In the section Literary Hall#Architecture, the first paragraph is now:

• Both the interior and exterior of Literary Hall remain largely intact from their original construction between 1869 and 1870. At two stories, the building is tall in its proportion and incorporates architectural elements from both early American and Victorian architectural styles, which were common in academic buildings constructed during this period. Architectural historian S. Allen Chambers described Literary Hall as an "architectural anomaly" due to its basic design and fenestration patterns invoking early Federal and Greek Revival design elements, with details more characteristic of the Victorian era.

1) I noticed that there is quite a bit of repetition of the same word, or various forms of the same word. I've highlighted one in italics and the other in bold.

If a way could be found to reduce the repetition, either by leaving a word out or using a synonym, it would improve the style of the writing.

I've changed some instances, and removed others. Please take a look and let me know what you think. Thank you for the suggestion! -- West Virginian (talk) 02:04, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

2) Regarding he first sentence, just one or two sections above this you gave the dates of construction of Literary Hall. I wonder if "between 1869 and 1870", or even "from their original construction between 1869 and 1870", could be omitted. This would leave:

• Both the interior and exterior of Literary Hall remain largely intact.

I've removed the end of the sentence, and I've rendered as you've suggested above. Thanks again! -- West Virginian (talk) 02:05, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

3) Regarding the last sentence, I don't feel that it explains the anomaly correctly. Right now, it says "S. Allen Chambers described L. H. as an...anomaly due to..................., with details...

I think it should be expressed as:

• ...S. Allen Chambers described L. H. as an anomaly because the basic design and fenestration patterns, which invoke early Federal and Greek Revival design elements, are adorned with details more characteristic of the Victorian era.

I think this expresses the anomalous juxtaposition of styles better. Corinne ( talk) 00:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, thank you for your review and for leaving your thoughtful comments regarding the ongoing peer review of Literary Hall. I promise to address these later this evening! -- West Virginian (talk) 23:40, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, thank you again for your re-review and for your suggestions. I've incorporated the last suggestion as well. Thank you for continuing to improve the overall quality of this article! -- West Virginian (talk) 02:08, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Congrats on your newly-minted featured article! Keep up the great work! - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:32, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Neutralhomer, many thanks for the review, guidance, and continued encouragement! My goal is to one day have one featured article for every one of the 25 NRHP listings in Hampshire County. It may take me a few years, but I'll get there at some point. Thanks again! -- West Virginian (talk) 23:35, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm curious. Was this your first time making the finals? Have you participated in the Wikicup before? RO ^(talk) 18:45, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Rationalobserver, this was indeed my first time making the finals at WikiCup. Last year was my first WikiCup, but I was knocked out in the penultimate round. I enjoy participating in the WikiCup, even though I know I would never have a shot at winning due to the cup's strange points calculation method. Still though, I always have fun participating, and it encourages me to write more articles about West Virginia topics, and more often. Thank you again for the peer review, and congratulations on winning "Best Newcomer" at WikiCup! -- West Virginian (talk) 23:33, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you commented on Christ Church, Newton's last FAC. I wanted to inform you that the nomination has been restarted here if you'd like to comment on it again. Thanks The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 23:27, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

The C of E, thank you for the notification. I will re-review the article and will share my comments as soon as is possible! -- West Virginian (talk) 23:34, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Mayors of Wheeling, West Virginia, which you created, has been nominated for possible 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:32, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.

This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is Godot13 ( submissions) ( FP bonus points). All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. Cas Liber ( submissions), a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.

Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to Rationalobserver ( submissions). Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.

A full list of our award winners are:

• Godot13 ( submissions) ( FP bonus points) wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 330 featured pictures in the final round.
• Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 160 did you knows in the final round (310 in all rounds).
• Cas Liber ( submissions) wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for 26 featured articles in all rounds.
• West Virginian ( submissions) wins the prize for fourth place
• Calvin999 ( submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• Rationalobserver ( submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• Harrias ( submissions) wins a final 8 prize and the FL prize for 11 featured lists.
• Rodw ( submissions) wins the most prizes: a final 8 prize, the GA prize for 41 good articles, and the topic prize for a 13-article good topic and an 8-article featured topic, both in round 3.
• ThaddeusB ( submissions) wins the news prize for the most news articles in round 3.

We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · logs), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs · logs) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · logs) 18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Figureskatingfan, Sturmvogel 66 and Miyagawa, thank you tremendously for this 4th place award. It was a privilege to participate in the WikiCup this year, and I hope to again next year. -- West Virginian (talk) 09:22, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I've nominated this article for FAC which also happens to be my first attempt. It is also the first Indian Telugu film article to be nominated for such status. If interested, please leave your comments here. All constructive comments are welcomed. Yours sincerely, Pavanjandhyala ( talk) 09:12, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Pavanjandhyala, due to my continued busy schedule, I will be unable to review this FAC at this time. I apologize, but I hope to review your next FAC and wish you the best of luck on this one! -- West Virginian (talk) 16:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

No issues. All the best for your endeavours! Pavanjandhyala ( talk) 17:13, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Kailash29792 has nominated the article for FAC. Feel free to leave comments at its FAC page.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:29, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Kailash29792, as I told Pavanjandhyala above, I am unable to review this FAC at this time due to my continued hectic schedule. I apologize, but I hope to review your next FAC and wish you the best of luck on this one! -- West Virginian (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, WV! Hope you are well. I have just finished reading and copy-editing an interesting article, the story of Henry Hoʻolulu Pitman. I wonder if you can think of a better way to express this sentence, the first sentence in Henry Hoʻolulu Pitman#Legacy:

• The memory of Henry Hoʻolulu Pitman was remembered by friends and family members back in Massachusetts and Hawaii.

Does that sound right to you? "The memory of.... was remembered"? Would you delete "The memory of" and just say,

• Henry Hoʻolulu Pitman was remembered by friends and family members back in Massachusetts and Hawaii.

or keep "The memory of" and change "was remembered" to something else? You might find this article interesting since it's about the American Civil War in the area of Virginia. Corinne ( talk) 01:32, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

• I wonder if "Pitman was memorialized by friends and family members in Massachusetts and Hawai'i." would work better here. Thank you for sharing this article with me! It is most certainly an intriguing one! I apologize for my late response {[u| Corinne}} and I hope to become more active on Wikipedia again soon once my schedule opens up a bit! -- West Virginian (talk) 16:51, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello TWL users! We hope JSTOR has been a useful resource for your work. We're organizing a cleanup drive to correct dead links to JSTOR articles – these require JSTOR access and cannot easily be corrected by bot. We'd love for you to jump in and help out!

Sent of behalf of Nikkimaria for The Wikipedia Library's JSTOR using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I have always been fascinated by the Mingo Oak and I appreciate your good work in describing all of the facets of the tree. I live in northern Ohio but I took a drive down to Mingo County a few weeks ago to look at the site where the tree grew. The area has changed dramatically since the 1930's. The small road is now a 4 lane highway. A railroad track (now abandoned) goes through very close to the spot where I believe the tree grew. The terrain has been changed due to logging and the construction activities. I really couldn't find an obvious spot where I thought the tree grew based on descriptions I have gotten from old newspaper accounts, pictures etc. In particular I was looking for remnants of the concrete cap that was poured over the stump. No luck.

The Wikipedia article has a very precise coordinate location listed, down to 0.000001 degrees lat/long. By my calculations, that locates the tree site to coordinates within an accuracy of less than one foot. I know that is not practical, and I know the article uses the word "approximate" to describe the coordinates. But still I am curious where the coordinates came from? When I load the coordinates in Google Earth (which I have found to be rather accurate) I get the tree's location on a rather steep slope very roughly about 200' east northeast of where I think the general spot might have been. I know it's all rather trivial and academic. But can you give me some sort of reference or source for those coordinates.

Again thanks for sharing all of your good work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FermiParadox ( talk • contribs) 02:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

• FermiParadox, the coordinates in the article are an estimation based on contemporary descriptions of the location. I had placed them in there as a placeholder at the time of its drafting until I was able to find a source with a precise location for the tree. Unfortunately, I was never able to find such a source. Please let me know if you are able to find coordinates in the meantime. I will remove the current coordinates from the article. Thank you for your message! -- West Virginian (talk) 16:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the Battle of the Bulge Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the collapse of the Serbian Army in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

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) 13:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of tallest buildings in the United States page, your edit caused a URL error ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello WV! I have opened a peer review for actress Sonam Kapoor. If you have got time and interest, please leave your suggestions here. -- Frankie _talk 10:56, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Hey WV, hope all is well with you. I was wondering, what did you have to do in taking List of counties in West Virginia to Featured List status? I ask because I am wanting to take List of radio stations in Virginia to Featured List status, but I haven't the slighest clue where to begin. I'm hoping you can help. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:08, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Neutralhomer, take a look at Wikipedia:Featured list criteria. What I did with each of my lists is ensure that my table was neatly-formatted, and that I had inline citations for each of the rows, columns, or in some cases, cells. You also want to craft a comprehensive Wikipedia:LEAD section as an introduction to the list. Let me know if there are any ways I can further assist you with promoting this article to Featured List status! It looks like you are already off to a fantastic start with the template! -- West Virginian (talk) 21:22, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow reply, been all over the place of late. :) I think I get the gist of it and will work on it later this week. I'm working on a potential GA right now, but the FL is next on my to-do list. :) Thanks for the information and I might take you up on that offer for assistance. :) Hope all is well with you. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
May 2016 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals! All the best Gavin / – SchroCat ( talk) 10:15, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

SchroCat, thank you for your warm holiday wishes! They are greatly appreciated, and I'd like to wish you a Merry Christmas in return! -- West Virginian (talk) 02:18, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello everyone, and we would like to wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2016 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. There are some changes we'd like to announce before the competition begins.

After two years of serving as WikiCup judge, User:Miyagawa has stepped down as judge. He deserves great thanks and recognition for his dedication and hard work, and for providing necessary transition for a new group of judges in last year's Cup. Joining Christine ( User:Figureskatingfan) and Jason ( User:Sturmvogel 66) is Andrew ( User:Godot13), a very successful WikiCup competitor and expert in Featured Pictures; he won the two previous competitions. This is a strong judging team, and we anticipate lots of enjoyment and good work coming from our 2016 competitors.

We would also like to announce one change in how this year's WikiCup will be run. In the spirit of sportsmanship, Godot13 and Cwmhiraeth have chosen to limit their participation. See here for the announcement and a complete explanation of why. They and the judges feel that it will make for a more exciting, enjoyable, and productive competition.

The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. The judges are committed to not repeating the confusion that occurred last year and to ensuring that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Figureskatingfan ( talk), and Godot13 ( talk).-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Use {{ subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

FrB.TG, thank you for the holiday greetings! They were greatly appreciated, and I'd like to wish you a happy holidays in return! -- West Virginian (talk) 02:19, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could review this FL: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Lost in Translation (film)/archive1? It has been lacking in reviews. If you do that, you can ask me for a reviewing favor whenever you would like. Thanks, Johanna ^{(talk to me!)} 17:44, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Johanna, I am currently on an extended vacation from Wikipedia. I apologize for my absence and promise to review a future nomination of yours to make it up to you! Good luck! -- West Virginian (talk) 02:23, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Use {{ subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Esquivalience, I'd like to thank you for the season's greetings! I wish you the same, and thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia! -- West Virginian (talk) 02:22, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the German retreat from France in 1944 Op-ed: TomStar81 on empires of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I