User talk:KelleyCook/Archive 2007
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
Brady Quinn
Hi KelleyCook,
I certainly can understand your misunderstanding, but the section you deleted (regarding Brady Quinn's record) was not the work of an anonymous serial vandal.
Per the article History, User: Phydend had corrected the last of that anonymous vandalism at 1545hrs. Your edit at 1603hrs simply deleted a section that I had marked as "unreferenced" yesterday. It probably has some opinion therein, but it should not have been deleted pending someone determining that statements were factual or not.
Could you please revert it to the last version by User: Phydend or my last version User:Lmcelhiney as I'd rather not be blocked on the "3-revert rule."
Thanks for taking the time to correct this.
Take care,
Larry
Lmcelhiney 21:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- The reworked section is of course now fine, but it originally was added by this edit here [1]. This is a repeat vandal from a random Southeast Mich DSL account who pretty much only posts exaggerated claims about University of Michigan and negative things about Notre Dame. His account is routinely blocked soon afterwards. As usual, it was highly biased and the same things he always does (lowers Notre Dames law school/business rating, changes its location to South Bend, raise Michigan to #1, etc.). I just reverted all of his stuff. -- KelleyCook 15:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for the added information. I missed the originator and thought that you were suggesting that I was the serial vandal, sorry. My original point was that there probably were facts therein and we've collectively managed to attribute all of that into a worthwhile portion of the article. I'd like to help contribute to this article to allow it to move up the review scale on the WikiProject College football as indicated on the article talk page. To that point, I believe that the Vince Young article can offer us a template to improve this article. Any thoughts? Lmcelhiney 16:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- As you'll note, I didn't change the name, I just restructured the paragraph. Someone needs to get a definitive statement as it sounds like there are multiple sources with differences to me. (Though I could be wrong! :-)
-
Larry
Lmcelhiney 14:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Desubstitutions
Thanks for your note! My entire response is on my talk page for you to read. —Remember the dot (t) 21:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Cingular All-America Player, was selected for DYK!
 |
On January 14, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cingular All-America Player, 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. |
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 15:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
U.S. 12 - Junctions with I-94
In this case I would say the most prevalent would be the case - Per WP:USRD and WP:USH - we keep our junctions limited at 10 per route - if you wish to indicate the multiple I-94 junctions a more appropriate place would be on a sub-article for the state - U.S. Route 12 in Michigan. From Minneapolis eastward, U.S. 12 parallels I-94 (except between Madison and Chicago where it takes a more southeasterly direction away from I-94.) I would suggest the most prevalent place to note a junction with I-94 is Ypsilanti, Michigan and remove all other junctions with I-94 from the infobox. • master_sonLets talk 16:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
M6 Paul Henry Freeway
I was wondering if the citation needed can be removed from the info about the design of the freeway. I put in some comments hidden since there is no way to cite it properly. To give you an idea about why it is difficult to cite is this. One of the early 90's transportation bills told the states they must design any new roads using fed money with metric. This was fine but contractors needed english measurements so a few roads got messed up with the conversions (they did not convert everything on some of the blueprints) as such most states if not all have told the feds to bother somebody else. M6 was a road designed and built in metric during that time but after a few years of messing around with it they canceled the idea in the State. --Mihsfbstadium 10:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't originally add the {{fact}}, that was done[2] by User:Bkonrad. That being said I would think the comments should suffice. -- KelleyCook 14:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for clearing up the matter with the now departed Hondasaregood. I now understand that I shouldn't have deleted those two articles on college footballers and will refrain from doing so in the future. It's just sad that he couldn't have stayed after the incident. I apologize for any upset caused during or before the debate. Bobo. 13:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: My RFA
Thanks for the support. I don't think time-based qualifications are valid, as being around for a year doesn't mean much (as you said yourself, I've done a lot). It's like the (and my favorite) philosophical question: When does a pile of leaves become a pile? 1? No. 5? Probably not. 50? Maybe. 10000? For sure. Experience and time should be melted together. Somethings just can't be quantified by numbers. I agree I haven't been around here very long, especially compared to folks that have been here since 2003 or more! But RFA's should judge trust overall, and apparently some people have a few reasons to think I wasn't quite ready. I do appreciate the support and plan to give it another go in a few months. I just look on the positive side: I won't have to spend all my time deleting the 20,000+ orphaned fair use images that BJBot marked (I was the idea behind it, but not the programmer). Thanks again for the support and I'll be looking for you next time. --MECU≈talk 20:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
{{convert}}
Wow! I'm impressed. Way to pick your way through {{convert}}'s coding! You added the units flawlessly ;) high five. drumguy8800 C T 08:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
U.S. Roads Newsletter Issue #1
   The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 1 | 10 February 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 20:37, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Strgate Trivia
Thank you for your edit summary on this page. I appreciate that you looked enough at the full edits of the IP address in question and recognized their actions as a whole were disruptive even if the one edit to the page in question happened to be of merit. The ability to separate an action from the motive for such action is a trait I find many wikipedians seem to lack. Thank you for your intelligence and your good work. TheGreenFaerae 02:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
University of Notre Dame
Why did you revert this edit? *Mishatx*-In\Out 22:42, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- For the same reason I and others have reverted this particular edit in various forms at least a dozen times. Please look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Tolatola. Notice the only page he/she contributes too. Although I'm not going to bother with going through the official Sockpuppet nomination as that is pointless. Even if proven, this particular nom-de-plume will just disappear. It is apparent that the same person, has put this same trivial comment numerous times -- and only on the Notre Dame page, mind you. That fits anyones definition of a serial vandal. Moreover the comment is purely trivial and pointless and clearly is an attempt to "push an agenda" which is against policy. Whoever might care about this particular result from this survey could consult the Princeton Review survey for themselves; it is not a duty of Wikipedia to advertise. Furthermore as I used to put when I reverted this comment, the Princeton Review survey is not a definitive source and even worse falls under the definition of a WP:SPAM as they require registration to access their site. Finally, at some point this person tried to sneak in yet another non-notable Dream School reference from that same source and then attempted to use it to justify their anti-gay statement. Therefore, until an WP:ARB rules against me, this random pointless comment will be removed. -- KelleyCook 03:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 2
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 20:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Stanley Griswold
Hey KelleyCook, thanks for improving the page on my father Hap Moran but now that I see your user page I have a question for you - about Stanley Griswold. He was a veteran of the revolutionary war and the minister of our church in New Milford, Connecticut. In 1804 he was Secretary of Michigan Territory and acting Governor. In 1808 he was appointed a Senator from Ohio to fill out a resigned term. I'm looking for an image of him - engraving, drawing, painting, etc. He's one of the few Senators who does not have some image in the Library of Congress - any ideas of where else to look? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Revmoran (talk • contribs) 03:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC).
- Sorry, I do not know where to look for this. -- KelleyCook 16:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 3
 The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 3 | 10 March 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.
Active user verification
Hello, KelleyCook. Due to the high number of inactive users at WP:USRD, we are asking that you verify that you are still an active contributor of the project. To do so, please add an asterisk (*) after your name on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter/List. Users without one by the next issue in 2 weeks will be removed off the list and off the respective road projects as well. If you have any questions, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 20:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 4
 The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 4 | 24 March 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 22:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Metro Detroit Freeways
Hi, KelleyCook. I just moved this from the top, because I just now realized that new additions go at the bottom of the page. You made the following comment on why you deleted a paragraph that I had written. I appreciate the explanation. :-) (from "List of gaps in Interstate Highways")
"I-275 is not a connection gap, it is a legitimate loop between I-75 and I-96"
"Loops" are only supposed to bypass a certain area, and connect to the parent at both ends (the Capital Beltway, e.g.). Sure, 275 is a shortcut if you want to switch from 75 North to 96 West, on a journey from Monroe to Lansing. But I think 275 is more importantly used for bypassing the city of Detroit while driving on 75 North (dictated by the number 275 if you look at the IHS numbering scheme), although US-23 on its own does at least as good a job (talking about cross-country drivers, not local residents). I'm glad you didn't delete my addition about the definitions of even/odd numbered 3-digit highways. I put that in there to justify my notes about 275 and 696, since both are even numbers, and neither conform to even numbered standards. 275 is a connection gap because the northern terminus is not 75, that's how I see it. Doesn't matter if you can get there by other routes. Also, 696 should be odd numbered. Maybe they just liked the sound of 696. I do...
Ypsidan 02:28, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, Your misunderstanding is in the very first statement about even number 3di standards. See Interstate Highway System#Three Digit Interstates. An even number auxiliary interstate (aka loop 3di) is actually the correct number to connect any two Interstates. Note that I-696 (an even number) connects (and has since the day it was put on the books) I-96 and I-94. Also see 3di primer @ Kurmai.com.
- I do understand the original routing that I-275 was supposed to go up to reconnect Davisburg, and even why it was built with four lanes while portions of the I-75 in Oakland County remained at 2 lanes until 1987 … but obviously things changed. Nevertheless that doesn't mean that the designation was wrong after the road was canceled. -- KelleyCook 03:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 5
 The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 5 | 5-8 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Apologies for the late delivery, TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 04:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
iTunes edit revert?
Why did u revert this edit? It is the subject of discussuion in the iTunes:Talk please contribute to the discussion and your rationale before simply vandalising accurate edits. Are you a sock puppet or friend of the previous reverter? It is very suspicious. If you can cited a reference please do so before editing!? Please provide a suitable explanantion in the comment to your edit. Thankyou. 220.240.58.190 14:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The attention IP banner at User talk:220.240.58.190
FYI: This is not a variable IP. IT IS FIXED AND BELONGS TO ME FOR LIFE OF MY SERVICE AGREEMENT (CONTRACT) WITH MY ISP! PLEASE refrain from editing or vandalizing my page with this banner. Thankyou. My username is "Mattjs" but I occassionally forget to log in but i am not a sockpuppet and no one else and no other socket puppets whould be able to use this address unless they are spoofing it. Thankyou. 220.240.58.190 14:28, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Nope, ISP banners always belong for a dynamic address (Note that it says Dynamic in the hostname). -- KelleyCook 15:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Read my words:
- IT IS NOT DYNAMIC
- IT IS FIXED FROM MY ROUTER AROUND THE WORLD AND IS ONLY DYNAMIC ON MY SIDE OF THE ROUTER AND I AM THE ONLY ONE USING IT!
- I HAVE HAD THE SAME WORLD WIDE IP ADDRESS FOR AT LEAST A YEAR IF NOT TWO YEARS. IT MAY OR MAY NOT APPEAR TO BE DYNAMIC BECAUSE OF IPV6 (I DO NOT KNOW).
- AND FINALLY I AM A QUALIFIED EXPERT IN COMPUTER SCIENCE.
Regards. You might now like to explain your iTunes revert Thankyou!? 220.240.58.190 15:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 6
 The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
|||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 6 | 21 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | |||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 7
|
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
|||||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 7 | 5 May 2007 | About the Newsletter | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —VshBot (t • c) 19:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
brinkster.com extlinks
Hi KelleyCook, I see you reverted a bunch of removals to brinkster.com extlinks by User:24.58.150.100 and left that person a talk message. Have you actually looked at those links? From what I've looked at, it appears to me that the removed links don't remotely meet the criteria of WP:EL, Wikipedia's external links guideline, so the removals are correct and should not be reverted. 75.62.6.237 01:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Undiscussed, multi-article reversions, by an first time anonymous editor are not to be tolerated. -- KelleyCook 14:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- According to what guideline? The anonymous editor is removing links to a website that shouldnt be used as a reference. --Ezeu 21:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- And what Wikipedia rule would be the reason that site not be used as a reference, it is well reasearched and well documented website with links to the patents. Though some seem to dislike his website (I can find nothing really objectionable) to just copy the links from without crediting him would be pure plagiarism. -- KelleyCook 21:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- The website is written by an anonymous author who refutes the contributions of nearly all significant black inventors. That the website is commonly cited by Stormfront, ANP and such organizations further shows that there is a specific agenda, an agenda that Wikipedia is now helping to spread. In any case it is not a reliable source and should not be used as a reference. --Ezeu 21:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Wrong on both counts. Every page mentions that the website was written by Ian Taggert. The fact that racists organizations link to the site is not evidence that the site itself has an agenda. Until Wikipedia bans the site, it should continue to be used. The references it gives are solid. -- KelleyCook 22:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- The consensus is that it not be used. Please stop referring to it, because you feel the "evidence" is not there, well it is, and therefore NOT a reliable source, in this instance. Because there IS evidence that puts a racist mark on it for the very reason you use to defend no evidence, contradicts your reasoning. Consensus rules over this. If their references are valid, use the referenced THEY use, not the site, but the reference to support the "evidence." Thanks. - Jeeny Talk 14:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Kindly point me to this consensus for Wikipedia. Personally, I really don't care about using it on the Garrett Morgan page (and as you can see left the reference in a comment). But it is another matter entirely to go erasing all references on Wikipedia as User:BFritzen has done. -- KelleyCook 17:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)'
- The consensus is that it not be used. Please stop referring to it, because you feel the "evidence" is not there, well it is, and therefore NOT a reliable source, in this instance. Because there IS evidence that puts a racist mark on it for the very reason you use to defend no evidence, contradicts your reasoning. Consensus rules over this. If their references are valid, use the referenced THEY use, not the site, but the reference to support the "evidence." Thanks. - Jeeny Talk 14:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Wrong on both counts. Every page mentions that the website was written by Ian Taggert. The fact that racists organizations link to the site is not evidence that the site itself has an agenda. Until Wikipedia bans the site, it should continue to be used. The references it gives are solid. -- KelleyCook 22:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- The website is written by an anonymous author who refutes the contributions of nearly all significant black inventors. That the website is commonly cited by Stormfront, ANP and such organizations further shows that there is a specific agenda, an agenda that Wikipedia is now helping to spread. In any case it is not a reliable source and should not be used as a reference. --Ezeu 21:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- And what Wikipedia rule would be the reason that site not be used as a reference, it is well reasearched and well documented website with links to the patents. Though some seem to dislike his website (I can find nothing really objectionable) to just copy the links from without crediting him would be pure plagiarism. -- KelleyCook 21:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- According to what guideline? The anonymous editor is removing links to a website that shouldnt be used as a reference. --Ezeu 21:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
First, www33.brinkster.com is only used on wikipedia to discredit those of African descent. Second, KelleyCook DELETED documented material about the traffic signal AND the gas mask simply because it did not match her ideology. The documentation is from the Federal Highway Authority, the Smithsonian, MIT all scholarly institutions. Further, if you had read the discussion, you would have known that all was to be left untouched until a moderator was brought in. This was done so that readers would have ALL information from various sites and could make up their mind on their own. Deleting documented information (as I have learned) is vandalism. --BFritzen 22:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- No personal attacks. --Ezeu 22:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- KelleyCook, I changed my stance for the moment. I admit I do not know enough about this man, and I am offended by the Brinkster site because it does seem to go out of its way to discredit those of African decent. But, I have looked for other references and it seems misinformation is abound. I'd rather leave this to the experts. I am no expert. And my feelings have nothing to do with this so I will step back. I just hope for fairness and accuracy. And because I do not like something does not mean that I will sacrifice truth to defend a misconception. But I reserve my right to change my mind.... but never to change the truth (to be clear). disclaimer, one's truth, is another's lie. There are some who are very good at hiding behind truth, in order to push an agenda, and I'm against that too. Argh, I'm sorry if I get so wordy because of trying to cover all frikken sides and sounding wishy-washy. Argh. I make myself crazy. - Jeeny Talk 23:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 8
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 8 | 19 May 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —VshBot (t • c) 19:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 9
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
|||||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 9 | 9 June 2007 | About the Newsletter | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —VshBot (t • c) 16:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
University of Notre Dame Template
I posted this on the talk board as well but since you were the last person to edit it and I've seen your work on several other ND pages, I thought asking you would be helpful. The current color scheme for the Template doesn't really do the "gold" in Blue/Gold justice. What do you think about making updates? I have one out there already if you want to take a peek: Proposed Version. Fuhreeus 16:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that it was looking Michiganish. So, I took the colors from und.com and then reformatted the whole box. I think it looks a lot better now. -- KelleyCook 18:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well done. Thanks. Any chance you also post on a notorious Notre Dame nation-al message board?Fuhreeus 11:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 10
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
|||||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 10 | 7 July 2007 | About the Newsletter | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —VshBot (t • c) 04:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
refute your position
on I-94, there has been photographs showing such instances of BGS posted by ITHA using I-94 North and South, but the signs were not on the mainline AFAIK. Whether or not they're still standing today is not known.
I-26 is another story. NC renumbered their exits to reflect the extension shortly after that final segment is completed. The 2006 Rand McNally Road Atlas still has it were I-26 in TN has exit numbers that is still consistent with a north-south highway. However, it is signed east-west. -- Ayrlie, 11 July 2006, 11:46 (CDT)
IEEE 802.11/Archive Index
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on IEEE 802.11/Archive Index, by Appraiser (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because IEEE 802.11/Archive Index fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting IEEE 802.11/Archive Index, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 17:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Bot archiving
Thanks for the note. I didn't know how the critter worked, and I noticed another editor had archived parts. Perhaps the parameters could soon be loosened as activity tapers off. Regards, Kablammo 21:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
An important letter
Dear roads editor,
You may have noticed some changes at WP:USRD lately. Some of them, like the cleanup templates and the stub templates, have been astounding and great. Unfortunately, others have been disturbing.
This has become evidenced by the departure of a few prominent editors at USRD, a few RFC's, and much fighting among USRD editors.
After the second RFC, many of us found the opportunity to take a step away from Wikipedia for a while--as a self-imposed wikibreak, or possibly on vacation.
The result of such introspection was that many of us were placing ourselves in a "walled garden" and on a self-imposed pedestal of authority over the roads department. Also, we were being hostile to a few users who were not agreeing with us.
In fact, IRC has been the main incarnation of this "walled garden." Decisions have been made there to conduct grudges and prejudices against a few valued USRD users with poor justification.
For this, we have come to apologize. We have come to ask your forgiveness.
In addition to this, we hope to work as one USRD team from now on and to encourage cooperation instead of the promotion of interests.
All users are welcome to collaborate on IRC, the newsletter, or anywhere else at USRD.
In the future, please feel free to approach us about any issues you may have.
Regards,
- Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)
- TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats
- master sonT - C
- SonTalk
- (→O - RLY?)
Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 17:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I-35W bridge
Hello. What is the source for the 121' height? I cannot find it on the 1965 plans. An approach span tops off at an elevation of 847', but that is over land; the middle main span (the only one over water) is lower. Regards, Kablammo 14:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- I was looking at the profile data on page 66. I didn't check to see if the high spot was over the water. I'll put it back to 115'. -- KelleyCook 14:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Another user had done some calculation from the grade profile and had about 116.5' over midspan-- I had done a similar exercise and (if I recall correctly) had about 115' on north end of center main span and ~118' on south end of it. Thanks. Kablammo 15:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
3RR rule
I'm pretty sure the 3RR rule does not apply to vandalism reverts. I will take the warning under advisement, but when users make edits to change material that is properly cited, I believe that constitues vandalism. Terryfoster 03:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 11
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Volume 1, Issue 11 | 18 August 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 12
|
|
|
| The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
| Volume 1, Issue 12 • September 1, 2007 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
| Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS | ||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
College Football National Championship
Kelly, while you may think that my edits were a "fairly disingenuous post" as all I did "was bump USC before everyone else," you are mistaken. I reordered the tables to put the most recent winners in EACH tally first, followed by the next most, etc. Others have undone the changes for their own giggles, I suspect. I find it a bit uncalled for to post the comments you did. Newguy34 03:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Your following two edits completed what your summary initially stated. It looks good now. -- KelleyCook 12:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 13
|
|
|
| The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
| Volume 1, Issue 13 • September 15, 2007 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
| Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS | ||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — Rschen7754bot 19:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
USRD Inactivity check and news report
Hello, KelleyCook. We had a few urgent matters to communicate to you:
- 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.
- 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) 23:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 14
|
|
|
| The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
| Volume 1, Issue 14 • September 30, 2007 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
| Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS | ||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —O bot (t • c) 01:37, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Wireless networking categories
Hello - Please give me some background on your ideas for categorizing 802.11 vs Wireless networking. E_dog95 Hi 18:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Exit numbers and signage
With Google Maps driving directions, you can drag it to use any exit ramp, and it will give you the exit number and signage. --NE2 02:34, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
By the way, do you have or know of any good sources for the construction of and controversy relating to the Jeffries Freeway in Detroit? Thank you. --NE2 10:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Iphone
Hi Kelley, I don't want to start an edit war so I wanted to head off any disagreement ahead of time. I reverted your change to the Apple Hot News page as a reference for the 3rd party native apps on the iPhone because that is a dynamic page that is changed often, and will probably not even have Steve's letter on it in a week. I totally agree that having an "official" source like Apple itself is ideal but until Apple provides a static page we can reference I don't think using it is a good idea.
FYI, I already started a discussion on the talk page before making any edits, and I used one of the references suggested in that discussion. If you have an idea please contribute, I'd like to hear ideas you have about the best way to reference this. Thank you! -- Atamasama 21:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. We can adjust it once Apple puts it in a permenant location. -- KelleyCook 23:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 15
|
|
|
| The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
| Volume 1, Issue 15 • October 20, 2007 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
| Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS | ||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —O bot (t • c) 23:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter - Issue 16
|
|
|
| The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
| Volume 1, Issue 16 • November 17, 2007 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
| Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS | ||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —O bot (t • c) 00:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Category:Wireless networking
I approached you some months ago to gain some understanding of your methods in this category. I'm following up now with the intention of asking you not to remove categories that "overlap". Remember, you and I are intimately familiar with these topics, articles, and categories. The users of Wikipedia may not be. Having articles with multiple (and sometimes overlapping) categories serves these users. What we're offering them are multiple ways to easily locate articles.
Lets leave more categories (as opposed to less) for the benefit of the average Wikipedia user. Thank you! E_dog95 Hi 03:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- Fine by me. -- KelleyCook (talk) 17:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Music Article Spammer
75.92.61.171, a music article spammer you identified, continued spamming after your warning and has re-emerged as 132.178.121.13 on Yahoo! Music. Please advise. --Eddroid (talk) 18:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- They only have one contribution, so I've given them a warning. Possibly it was good faith and will stop -- KelleyCook 21:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
WP:BRD on digital rights management
Bold, revert, DISCUSS. Not, bold, revert, edit war. DISCUSS. You've demonstrated that you understand how to use Wikipedia well enough to use the tools... now, use them correctly. Don't edit-war. I and other editors will be happy to discuss the changes with you on the talk page, but you are absolutely not welcome to repeatedly raze entire sections of an article without discussion. Thank you. -/- Warren 17:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter notice
Hello KelleyCook. As per discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter, the "transclusion" delivery option for the newsletter has been eliminated and replaced with a subscription template beginning with the December 15 newsletter delivery. The template is modeled off of the one used by the Wikipedia Signpost and can be found at {{USRD-news-subscription}}. It will automatically update every month, bringing the most recent stories from the USRD newsletter direct to you. The template has been appended to your talk page adjacent to this message; you may move this template to wherever you choose. If you do not want to receive the newsletter in this manner, you may switch to a different delivery option here. Suggestions to improve the subscription template are welcome on either the template's talk page or the newsletter talk page. Regards, TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 04:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
