User talk:Finetooth/Archive 1

Hi. I'm sorry to bother you, but as a LoCE member, I just wondered if you would be willing to have a look through the Sheerness article. It is currently a Featured Article Candidate and needs a copy-edit for grammar by someone who hasn't yet seen it. Any other ways to improve the article would also be welcome. Thank you very much, if you can. Epbr123 12:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm very sorry I haven't had a chance to welcome you earlier, I have been incredibly busy lately. We are glad to have your help. Currently, we have really cut down the backlog of articles in need of copyedit. Therefore, a major goal at this moment is to identify new articles that are in need of work. When you run across them, be sure to tag them for copyediting.

If you have any questions at all, do not hesitate to drop me a line. Trusilver 16:27, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Trusilver. Thanks for the welcome. I've found lots to do via the League and lots of good company. I haven't identified any new articles yet that are in need of work, but I eventually will. Finetooth 22:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sending you some of the information I have regarding the citation in the Ancash article:

• Geography: During the 1970s, the bay of Chimbote was the top fishing port of the world.[citation needed] --------- http://www.dreancash.gob.pe/ugel_santa.php ("Reseña histórica")

• Geography: The cycles of these two sea currents that affect Peru are unpredictable.[citation needed] ---------- EL NIÑO: UNA REVISIÓN BIBLIOGRÁFICA Roberto Villalobos Flores & José Alberto Retana - Instituto Meteorológico Nacional Gestión de Desarrollo

I hope this helps a bit. --Evelyn Zuñiga 18:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to have taken so long to get back to you; someone else left a message for me less than an hour later, and I didn't notice that I had two new messages.

As far as I know, it's generally accepted to have the ref=name format, largely because it gets rather inconvenient if you have several citations to the exact same work — for example, Richard Hawes has 72 citations but only 14 references; the references list is far simpler as a result. However, nobody says you have to do this — as well, since the ref=name is only used three times, it wouldn't make that much of a difference. The reason I put it into that format is that you were using part of the ref=name formatting yourself; the standard formatting for a single reference to a source is <ref></ref>. Hopefully I've been able to help you understand better; I use the ref=name feature so little myself, I'm not entirely sure of it either. Nyttend 13:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nyttend. I've just realized that it may be better to respond to talk-page messages on the talk pages on which they first appear. Oops!

I like the ref=name format, which is efficient and simple, as you say. My concern, which I didn't express clearly in my earlier message, is that if only the first instance of ref=name includes the full citation, deleting it will render the others useless. As the WP:MOS puts it, "One should be particularly careful when deleting one of the multiple named references, because the footnote text will be deleted unless it is copied to another ref tag with the same name." One way to head off this evil possibility is to include the full citation behind each ref=name tag. Does this make sense? Finetooth 23:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. Thank you for copyediting the article about Eugenio Espejo. That article failed its nomination to GA because one of its reviewers thought that it wasn't well written. Among the prose problems of the article (according to the reviewer), I would like to highlight two:

• Many of the article's paragraphs are short - some are even one sentence long. These need to be combined with other paragraphs or expanded.

• I don't think that all of the sentences with odd conjunctions in them that were pointed out by the above reviewer have been fixed, yet. I also noticed strange "but," "thus," etc. claims

I am aware that you just did some small edits to the article, so I want to ask you a question: as copyeditor, do you think those problems have been dealed with? I'm asking because I would like to nominate the article again. Once again thank you for your help! --Dalobuca 14:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

• • Alright! Thank you very much. —Dalobuca 21:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• Hi there Finetooth, I want to thank you for your help wiht the article about Espejo. It has (finally) been elected as good article! —Dalobuca 20:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dalobuca. I'm pleased to hear it. I agree that the article is good, and I was happy to help. Finetooth 20:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sundar. Thanks for the barnstar. It's my first. I really appreciate it. I enjoyed working on Persian women's movement. Finetooth 22:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

You deserve it! -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

		The Hindu Fire Barnstar
		Namaste, Finetooth! Thank you for copyediting Ganesha. I hope you will keep the article on your watchlist as we move it toward FAC. Keep up the good work! -- Buddhipriya

Thank you, Buddhipriya. I am pleased to have been able to help. I will keep Ganesha on my watchlist. Good luck! Finetooth 15:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I am another member of LoCE, and I also am a part of WikiProject Grammar. If you like LoCE, you should also consider joining WikiProject Grammar. It's pretty similar to LoCE from what I can tell, since you're still supposed to look for the copyedit tags. The project is basically dedicated to fixing the errors of the Wikipedians whose grammar ain't no good ;-) Oddmartian2 18:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)My Talk WikiProject Page

Hi Oddmartian. Thank you for the invitation. I'm flattered, and I will keep WikiProject Grammar in mind. However, LoCE is keeping me completely busy just now, and I'd better not spread myself too thin. Finetooth 21:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

That's okay. Consider it for the future, maybe--until then, keep up the good work with LoCE! Oddmartian2 13:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

For copyediting the Smolensk War article.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

You are most welcome. I'm pleased to help. Finetooth 04:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Go right ahead and add your signature. Editing activity on that page appears to be normal, with no very specific or direct focus on copyediting. If there is an issue with who should get credit (which I douby would be the case), it can be discussed on the WP:LoCE talk pages. --Sigma 7 01:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Finetooth. Chennai, a featured article, is currently being reviewed as a featured article removal candidate. The article as it stands is in good shape, in my opinion. But a round of copyediting by an able person like you would help much. Could you please check the issues raised at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Chennai and help us fixing them? Your own comments also will be most welcome. Thanks. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 04:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sundar. Yes. I'd be glad to help if I can. I'll have a look today and see what I can do. Finetooth 18:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your wonderful work with Chennai. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 04:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I was happy to help. I hope Chennai retains its FA status. Finetooth 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For expanding the Lock Haven, Pennsylvania article. Nice Work! Dincher 22:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Dincher. I appreciate it. I'd like to turn the History section into prose rather than the chronological list that's already there. I wish I knew what the sources were for the list. Also, a photo of the city skyline from across the river would be nice. I'd do it myself if I lived in Lock Haven. Finetooth 23:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Thanks for copyediting the Chennai article. The prose looks better than it did ever before! Lotlil 05:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Lotlil. Thank you for the compliment and the barnstar. I was glad to help. Finetooth 01:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

...for proofreading History of Stoke City F.C.. Dave101→talk  19:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome. Finetooth 21:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

You have done a great job on Ganesha. The article Ganesha is now FAC but some editors are finding some errors in the wording on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ganesha. Please help in the rewording. Thanks.--Redtigerxyz 14:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I will have another look and see what I can do. Finetooth 20:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again.--Redtigerxyz 08:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to trouble you agin; but User:Karanacs has Opposed' to the FAC on grounds the lead is not smooth etc. If you agree with her/him; please correct it in the article; if you disagree; please write so on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ganesha. Thanks.--Redtigerxyz 15:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

At this point, I must bow out because I'm not comfortable with choosing sides on this particular issue. Finetooth 18:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I understand. Do not take sides. But will you please take a look at the Lead; the Worship section and Common attributes; if you are comfortable with it ? --Redtigerxyz 05:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I've spent so much time on Ganesha that I can't see it clearly any more. This kind of burn-out often happens to writers and editors, and their usual resort is to hand the manuscript to another writer or editor with a fresh set of eyes. A lot of people have contributed to the Ganesha article, and they may also be getting cross-eyed. Perhaps you can find an editor who has not seen the manuscript and who can come to it fresh. Finetooth 20:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all you did for Ganesha; a second time.--Redtigerxyz 10:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Redtigerxyz 05:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on pushing Ganesha through to FA. I'm pleased to see it. I'm sending a thank you note to Galena11, copyeditor par excellence. Finetooth 18:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Finetooth - I had noticed your work on Jersey Shore, Pennsylvania and think it is great someone finally started adding more Pennsylvania canal articles. I would be bold and add more canal articles.

Nice expansion of Lock Haven - I have two photos of Lock Haven on Commons already that I think you will like: Image:Clinton County Pennsylvania Courthouse.JPG and Image:Canal Monument in Lock Haven Pennsylvania.JPG. I also have another photo I will add to Pennsylvania Canal (West Branch Division)‎.

Do you know much about Clinton County history? I am trying to puzzle out some things about early township history there for another article. Finally, Choess is someone you might also bounce ideas off of. He wrote the Bald Eagle and Spring Creek Navigation and is quite knowledgable on railroads and has written on trolleys too. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Messages on my page are fine - most people will reply on the other person's talk page, unless the User specifies otherwise at the top of their talk page. I usually watch a page I leave comments on for a while, so here would also be fine, whatever you prefer. Thanks for your kind words, always nice to have someone notice my contributions. I wikilinked the West Branch canal in Larrys Creek, it was one of those articles I had on my list to write eventually. You might also like White Deer Hole Creek as it rises in Clinton County (though I need to update it a bit).
My question was about Note B in List of municipalities in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. It took me a while, but I think I worked out the Wayne and Limestone (now Crawford) Twp histories there, however if you could see if it makes sense I would appreciate it. Also if you know any of the formation dates for the earliest Clinton County twps (now just before 1839) or know of a better source, that would be helpful. I still need to upload the image I have for the canal article.
Finally, to put a wikilink in text to an image without showing the image, use an initial colon, i.e. [[:Image:Clinton County Pennsylvania Courthouse.JPG]] gives Image:Clinton County Pennsylvania Courthouse.JPG. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for looking it over - I appreciate it very much and am glad it makes sense to someone with inside knowledge. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Good work on the canals! I'm quite impressed. One thing you might consider, if you're going to be working on the Commonwealth's canal network, is turning Pennsylvania Canal (presently a redirect) into a separate article from Main Line of Public Works; as you point out, not all of the canal system was part of the Main Line, and vice versa. I'm kinda busy these days, but since you like trolleys, I'll see if I can dig out "Little Railroads of the Lykens Valley" sometime and write up the local trolley line. Choess 13:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

On 20 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Susquehanna and Tidewater Canal, 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.

Cheers, Daniel 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Finetooth, congrats on the DYK (saw it on the Main Page and figured it was yours, then saw it here). If you have a chance, could you please look at Presque Isle State Park? It is a current Featured Article candidate and has recently been extensively revised, so it is likely an error or two has slipped in. Thanks in advance for any help with this, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Sure. I'd be glad to. Finetooth (talk) 02:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much - let me know if there is anything I can do for you! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I added the image of a canal marker from the West Branch Division to the article. Any published photo of a canal from before 1923 should be public domain. There is a photo of a "Canal at Flemington" on the PHMC Pennsylvania Canal web page here (page 3, right photo). The Lycoming County Historical Society Museum has a diorama of the West Branch Division - not sure when I'll get back there, but I can take a picture of it next time I'm there if you want. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. My understanding of the complications of photos and graphics on Wikipedia is still pretty limited, though I sorted through as much of the licensing stuff as I could stand and settled on dual licensing (GFDL and Cc-by-sa-3.0) of my own photos uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I need to learn more about using public domain material and map-making. The canal articles would all be better with maps, I think, as well as photos. I've used the existing Main Line of Public Works map in a few places, but it's not meant to show the whole network of Pennsylvania canals. If you can direct me to a map-making tutorial, or if you have any other suggestions, I'd appreciate your advice. That reminds me to thank you for the map of the old forts along the West Branch; when I was working on Lock Haven, I was delighted to find that map. The diorama sounds promising, too. No hurry on anything. I seem to have plenty to do. Finetooth (talk) 21:52, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I have a number of map requests on my plate, but I can add canal maps to the list. Here is a very brief intro into how I make some of my maps User:Ruhrfisch/Resources#Making_Maps. At one point Choess and I were working on a Lancaster County, PA map for canals and railroads, but it never got done. I think if you have a photo of a canal in a book,and that photo is older than 1923, then you are OK with scanning it, uploading it to Commons, and of course providing the source (book, web page, etc) where the photo came from. Thanks again for the copyedits to Presque Isle. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

	<font=3> Thanks for all your proofreading and copyedits - Presque Isle State Park made featured article today! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

		Pennsylvania State Parks Groundhog Award
		This Groundhog Award is presented to Finetooth for your proofreading and copyedits to Presque Isle State Park in support of its FAC. This award entitles you to free admission to all Pennsylvania state parks, but the hunting of groundhogs in them is still strictly prohibited. Given with respect and admiration, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'm delighted to hear the good news about Presque Isle State Park. I will continue to treat groundhogs with the kindness and respect they deserve. Finetooth (talk) 17:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for your attention to this. I'm truly amazed at what can be done. Is there some way of learning the skill other than practice? I also have a couple of queries, but I'll save them up for when you're finished. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 22:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)I

Thank you for the kind words. It's mainly years and years of practice. I'm sorry it's taking me so long. I'm away from home for several weeks, and the Internet connection here in the outback is double ungood. I've been unable to make a good connection for the past three hours or so. I'll keep trying. If you see nothing happening to the St Kilda page for many hours, that is the reason. Please feel free to remove the in-use template if I seem to have disappeared. I would feel bad if I left you hanging and wondering what in the world was going on. Finetooth 23:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I was able to get back on the Internet for extended periods last evening, and I edited through to the end of the article and removed the in-use template. I enjoyed working on St Kilda, which is a fascinating place. I'd be happy to answer any questions. I have a couple myself. I need to review the Wikipedia suggestions about ellipses, for example, and I'm a bit uncertain about how to do the subhead with the 17th and 18th centuries. Please feel free to undo any of my changes that seem unhelpful. Finetooth 16:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for an excellent job - especially so from the outback. I am only too used to remote spots with poor connections myself. I will go through it fully soon, and for now I only have two brief queries. Both are in the 'Way of life' section. You changed the tense of the phrase about waves lashing the beach. I think I originally had it in the present tense and now it's past. Of course the discussion is about the past way of life, but the waves still lash the beach. Either way it looks odd to me. Secondly, was there any reason other than brevity for removing 'either' after 'King George'? Somehow in my mind it created a sense of the incredulity the Red coats must surely have expressed at the St Kildan's ignorance of the world at large. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 08:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you on both counts, and I've reversed those three changes. My pursuit of brevity sometimes goes a bit too far, and you are right about 'either' adding emphasis. In the wave-lashing sentence, I picked the past to match the past in the surrounding sentences. However, your use of the present tense adds immediacy; we see the waves still and always crashing and dangerous. So, yes, I agree with you. I don't think hard-and-fast rules exist for many questions like this. If you find more, please let me know. Finetooth (talk) 19:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Dear Finetooth - many, many thanks for your hard work and assistance with this FAC, which has indeed finally passed muster. Please feel free to let me know if you need any assistance in return. Best wishes, Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 14:15, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

...for your proofread on my beloved William Cooley article.--Legionarius (talk) 20:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you please try not drag Vasa (ship) into the auto-linking of all full dates issue as well? We've had more than enough of that pointless dispute over at Swedish language.

Peter ^Isotalo 02:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Peter, I know nothing of the dispute at Swedish language, but I'll take a look. I'm responding to a request posted to the League of Copyeditors' (LoCE) page, as follows: "GAC written mainly by non-native speakers. A check by an experienced English speaker would be greatly appreciated. henrik•talk 01:27, 6 October 2007 (UTC)". I did not put a LoCE notice at the top of the Vasa page yet because I noticed that another editor was working on copyediting the lead. I have confined myself to small things thus far but intend to do a full edit of this interesting article. The question of autoformatting the dates is quite clear in WP:MOS. It says, "Only full dates or dates with a day and a month should be linked. The same applies to dates in the footnotes". I've tried to fix all of the dates in Vasa that did not conform.Finetooth (talk) 03:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I really appreciate your copyediting of the prose, but I would like to ask you not to link every single date you can find in the article. There have been a lot of very good arguments questioning this very strict interpretation of the MoS, particularly that of wikilinking of completely irrelevant retrieval dates of web references. The quote "The same applies to dates in the footnotes" does not appear to be present in the current version. I suspect this very sentence was inserted by some party in the dispute now being discussed at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Linking full dates.

If anything, try applying some common sense here. The wikilinking of retrieval dates serves only to make "a huge, ugly blue mess" and little else. Considering this is something that has already provoked a minor edit war and a major debate over at Swedish language, I think it would be prudent of you to revert the date changes until general consensus for this has formed over at the MoS talkpages.

Peter ^Isotalo 04:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Peter, This is most interesting. I had no idea any general dispute about autoformatting was going on. I had noticed, of course, that the autoformatting with pairs of square brackets was inherently confusing. I didn't like that, but I had no idea what to do about it. On the other hand, the fact that I don't like something doesn't count for much; to be a good editor, I have to try to follow the stylebook. Yet, you are right in saying that what I quoted from the MOS is not from the MOS but rather an interpretation. I didn't realize that when I quoted it, but I have checked the MOS again, and you are right. Common sense tells me that getting into a fight here about autoformatting is not a good idea. Still, without the MOS to rely on, I have no way to know what to do with the dates in Vasa. Perhaps the best thing for me at this point is to meddle with the Vasa dates no more. This brings another thought to mind. I see that metric units in Vasa are given precedence in some places, while English units are given precedence in others; conversions appear in some places and not in others. My interpretation of the MOS is that in articles about Sweden, metric gets preference, and quantities in the main text that have units should have conversions, metric to English, and also that the preferred spelling is metre not meter. If this sort of change is going to cause disagreement, I'd rather discuss it with you beforehand. Finetooth (talk) 05:01, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

As the original requester and other main author, your copyedits of Vasa are much appreciated! I'm sorry you got caught up in a different dispute unaware, but as you say, holding off on the dates for a little while may be good.

The Vasa predates the metric system, so the original measurements and the sources give the length in traditional units. If the context was historic we've used those units, but we've used metric units in modern contexts, which may be a bit confusing - but it is the convention of the sources we've used. Suggestions on how to improve this would be helpful.

And again, thanks for taking the time to copyedit! henrik•talk 08:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

henrik beat me to the explanation of the feed/metre-issue, but I would also like to point out that I appreciate your copyediting.

Peter ^Isotalo 10:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you both for your notes. I'll return to Vasa later today and do my best to improve it. I will make no further changes to the dates or the metric or English quantities or units. I will not be offended if you revert any of my changes that you strongly disagree with. This is a collaboration, and I don't own the page. I might have something to say later about one or both of the two issues we've discussed, and if so, I'll post them to the Vasa talk page or perhaps to one of the ongoing discussion pages. Please let me know if you see anything else going awry as I proceed with my editing. Finetooth (talk) 16:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, look! It's all shiny and new! I would like to thank you for doing such an excellent job proofreading Vasa (ship). I think you deserve this: henrik•talk 21:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		For excellent copyediting of Vasa (ship) and a calm response to an initial misunderstanding. henrik•talk 21:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Henrik. I really appreciate your kindness. Finetooth (talk) 22:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I notice that you've made several updates to the article, and I'm just wondering about your interest in it. I grew up there, you see, and I find it fascinating to find another Wikipedian with any interest in that town. I appreciate your additions! JSC ltd (talk) 19:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm an outsider who is visiting Basin, just down the road from Boulder. Knowing that I'd be visiting, I checked the Wikipedia articles about this area before I made my trip. Now that I'm here, I've been able to take photos of Basin Grade School and the Jefferson County Courthouse and upload them to the Commons, and I might find some other suitable subjects here for encyclopedia photos. I've been able to find quite a bit of text information on-line, as you've seen, but I'd like to add more about the history of both towns. Can you recommend any specific books or other sources of information about Basin or Boulder? I'd be most grateful for any advice you might give. Finetooth (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Finetooth. Thanks alot for copyediting the ARF article! It had been awhile I had posted it on the board and I had almost forgot about it. I checked your comments on the talkpage and have made some changes. I added some backround info to the church's division and cut-down on some [POV] repetitions in the philosophy section. What do you think now? Does it still need some changes? Feel free to edit what you think is POV and thanks again! - Fedayee (talk) 17:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Great work and many thanks for your all your contributions on the ARF article Finetooth. Enjoy!

		Armenian Barnstar of National Merit
		I, Fedayee, hereby award you this Barnstar of National Merit for the great copyediting and patient work you have done to improve the Armenian Revolutionary Federation article. Keep up the great work and hope to collaborate on more articles in the future.
		this WikiAward was given to {{subst:PAGENAME}} by ~~~ on ~~~~~

Thank you very much for the beautiful barnstar. I appreciate your thoughtfulness. Finetooth (talk) 19:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

	<font=3> Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 62/0/0 yesterday! I want to thank Snowolf and Dincher for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and since you are reading this, I haven't yet deleted your talk page by accident!). Please let me know if there is anything I can do to be of assistance, and keep an eye out for a little green fish with a mop on the road to an even better encyclopedia. Thanks again and take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 18:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks too for your kind words on my talk page, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

For proofreading Kraków's c/e.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 03:44, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

You are most welcome. It is a good article about a fascinating city Finetooth (talk) 03:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Since you've shown interest or made some contributions to Vasa (ship), I'd like to notify you that it has been nominated as an FAC. Your insights and comments would be much appreciated there.

Peter ^Isotalo 14:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Did you know that no civilian aircraft article is a featured article in Wikipedia. In fact, I see only two aircraft at all and they are military aircraft. This may change (or remain the same) as the Boeing 747 article is being considered for FA. Many like it although it may fail due to copy edit concerns.

Would you kindly help us out? It has been corrected recently but still needs an opinion. Please let me know if you can assist. Let me know if I can help you in any way.

Archtransit (talk) 19:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC) Need a few hours to consider it? Archtransit (talk) 20:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm flattered to be asked. I'm about halfway through editing an article on Belarus. I believe I can finish it today, and then I will turn my attention to Boeing 747. Finetooth (talk) 20:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your offer to help. It seems that 747 has been bumped by Vasa? The editors at the 747 article believe in self help so we've done about as much as we can but do need LOCE help to seal the FA nomination. One weakness is we write like aviation people, which is different from ordinary people. Aviation style tends to use long sentences with added detail. Archtransit (talk) 18:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm doing several things at once, including driving the next-door-neighbor to the hospital after a pit bull bit her. Helping with Vasa won't prevent me from helping with 747, which I intend to start doing in the next few minutes. Finetooth (talk) 23:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts so far; don't let my little edits stop you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 22:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome. I'll stop for a little while so that we don't cross-edit. I have to run some errands, and I should be back in five or six hours. I'll remove the in-use template and put it back when I return. If you see anything I am missing or have questions or comments, just let me know. Finetooth (talk) 22:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I pretty much have no questions and all of the edits I want to do are done. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 22:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I am the author of this FAC article. User:Michael Devore recommended that I request you for a copy edit of the article, which has run into grammar and presentation concerns on the FAC review. I request you to find time to copy edit this article and point out how I can improve it. Hope you find time to help me out. thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I would be pleased to help if I can. I have promised User:Archtransit that I would work on Boeing 747, and I must do that first. If you don't mind waiting for perhaps three days, I will see what I can do. Thank you for asking. Finetooth (talk) 23:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I will surely wait.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help on this FAC. Here's wishing you a merry holiday season and a properous new year.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 17:30, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome. I'm only about half-done, and I intend to continue today and perhaps tomorrow. I'm making quite a few small changes, trying to improve prose flow without distorting or falsifying the content. Making changes always involves the risk of introducing error where none existed. I will try my best, but please double-check my work and don't hesitate to revert anything that you think is incorrect or clumsy. Best wishes to you in this holiday season. Finetooth (talk) 18:15, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Everything looks fine so far.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I have copied your comments and my replies onto the FAC discussion page to make it visible to everyone.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. I hadn't thought of doing that. Finetooth (talk) 01:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Dear Finetooth, I wanted to wish you a very Merry Christmas and all the best for the New Year! Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, and Merry Christmas to you as well. I love the little tree. Finetooth (talk) 20:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Dincher (talk) 20:15, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Way cool! Merry Christmas to you too. Finetooth (talk) 20:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Due to your edits, Belarus became a featured article. I cannot thank you enough for your work on this article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I am very pleased to hear it, and I thank you for your kind words as well as the barnstar. My congratulations to you and a Happy New Year. Finetooth (talk) 15:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to give you a hearty thank you for your contributions and copy edits to the Death of Edgar Allan Poe article! I was wondering if you could take a quick look at the main article on Edgar Allan Poe as well - it's undergoing a fairly lengthy FA review and many comments are about the prose. It's been tackled quite a bit already so I'm not seeing anything else that needs changing - fresh eyes are needed!! Either way, thanks for the help on the death article! --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

With respect, I think I'll pass on this one. I'm heavily involved in other tasks connected to Wikipedia and to outside life. I enjoyed working on Death of Edgar Allan Poe, and I wish you good luck with Edgar Allan Poe. Finetooth (talk) 21:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, despite your protests, I see you've gone ahead anyway and did some copy editing - I knew you couldn't resist! Thank you so much! The article looks much better, and every little bit certainly helps! Happy New Year, by the way! --Midnightdreary (talk) 01:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I currently have Wormshill at FAC and see you have already passed on one c/e request (above). Ever the optimist (hopefully this will find you in quieter times) I wondered if you could take a quick look and see if there are any glaring issues. It has had one c/e recently but at least one reviewer seems to have continuing issues with the prose... Cheers in advance Dick G (talk) 21:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by, much appreciated. I think we're there now as most of the issues have been addressed. If you get a spare moment in the next few days and the FAC hasn't closed, please let me know if you have any final thoughts. Cheers.Dick G (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I was glad to help. As it happens, I'll be mostly out of range of the Internet between Wednesday and Saturday. If I get the chance to log on, though, I'll look to see what's happening with Wormshill. Best wishes. Finetooth (talk) 05:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, and Happy New Year!! I've come here to beg a favour, I'm afraid - I have two FAC-class articles in the wheels of the LOCE requests system, neither of which will (if left unattended) be touched for weeks. You would be doing me a great personal favour if you could find the time to look over Emma Watson (request) or Wicked (musical) (request) in the near future; I would be enormously grateful if I can face the dreaded "I don't think it meets criterion 1a)" comment knowing that they have a reasonable chance of being looked at before the end of the FAC. Many thanks in advance, Happy‑melon 21:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Happy‑melon. I'd be happy to help however I can. I should tell you that I have a real-life obligation that will take me away from my computer most of the time between Jan. 2 (tomorrow) and Jan. 5. If I can, I'll take a look at the articles later today and continue after I return on, probably, Saturday. It's good to have a direct chat with you. Our paths keep crossing at LoCE, but we're usually both in a hurry like the White Rabbit in Alice in Wonderland. Happy New Year. Finetooth (talk) 22:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I was thinking that the big "e" should be used when the word is written as a title, i.e. The Discovery Expedition and little "e" otherwise. What do you think? Lazulilasher (talk) 18:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I tried to find a definitive answer in the Manual of Style but failed. Then I Googled around to see what other people were doing; although I found instances of upper and lower, upper was much more common. I will revert my little "e" changes. Finetooth (talk) 19:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I replied about the notes on the Shackleton page. Let me know what you think. Lazulilasher (talk) 18:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I took a look at your edits and they look great. I left a message on the Shackleton talk page. THANKS! Lazulilasher (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent comment about the article on my user page. Would you please consider copying this on to the FAC page? Or can I copy your current reaction there?. Thanks a lot.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dinesh, Things were going along fine, I thought, until you moved part of our discussion from the article talk page to the FAC page. After that was done, I said, "good", and I moved another part to the FAC page myself. Shortly thereafter, I became uncomfortable because, I realized a bit too late, that my words might be misinterpreted as taking sides in a support-oppose fight. With respect, I am not on anybody's side, and I would prefer that my latest and future exchanges with you not become part of the FAC debate. Finetooth (talk) 00:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok. No problem.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 00:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Whenever you have time, could you do a light copy edit to the last section I added today called "Appreciation" in this article. I am sure there are some mistakes. Thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, never mind. I need to add some content anyway. So the cpedit can wait.thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I'm otherwise engaged at the moment, but I'll be happy to look at it later today or tomorrow. Finetooth (talk) 22:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. The last section I added called "Appreciation" could use some cpedits, to improve prose. So, Whenever you have time... thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I had a mind to add more, then decided to keep it brief.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I would just like to thank you for the contributions you made to 1988 Atlantic Hurricane Season regarding Copyediting. I'm very grateful for it, hopefully my article will pass without any further problems :) Thank you again Seddon69 (talk) 21:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Seddon69. I'm glad to help. Actually, I wasn't quite finished when I got called away on a real-life errand of four hours or so. I'm going to continue with 1988 Atlantic hurricane season this evening. It was in really good shape before I touched it, but I see a few more small things to polish. Finetooth (talk) 00:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I dont suppose you could do one more favor for me again with the 1988 Atlantic hurricane season. user:Tony1 feels that comma usage and semicolon usage are too much. I don't feel that my knowledge of english would result in a successful change of this and would most likely end up with me making things worse. I was wondering whether you'd be willing to have another look through this article and see if you can improve on this. Seddon69 (talk) 17:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I'll see if I can get to it later today. I may have gone overboard with the no-break space codes as well. The MOS seems a bit vague on whether things like nine cows need to be nailed together to prevent line wrap or if I should only bother my head about 12 cows or perhaps only about 12 metres. I'm always interested in seeing what other editors think about such dark and arcane matters. Finetooth (talk)

To be honest i think that when you refer to 18 knots and 25 houses they are both measuring something so i feel that if you are numbering something then you should have a nbsp. You may notice we have also expanded to include Category(nbsp)3 to prevent this breaking up. Seddon69 (talk) 18:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

How do you feel about nine(nbsp)cows and other combinations in which the number appears as a word rather than a set of digits? It's a bit tedious to add the codes to constructions like three children, five boats, six men, and so on. Perhaps it's looney. I'm willing to do it if the MOS says so or if consensus has been reached on the matter. On the other hand, I'd rather not bother if nobody cares about it. Finetooth (talk) 18:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

As far as i know there is no sch consensus about it, and it cannot be implemented wiki-wide unless its in MOSNUM. I think that in the instance that the number is worded there is no immediate need for there to be a nbsp, but thats just my opinion. Seddon69 (talk) 19:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you again for the editting your doing atm :) just to let you know with regards to the 2 problems you came across in the article that you mentioned on the talk page, (ill post this on the talk page as well) With regards to TD1 im simply gonna rephrase it so that it is left slightly open but less confusing. And with Tropical Depression 15 there is little information i can add due to the lack of information at this time on Tropical depressions and the fact it did not make landfall newhere. Seddon69 (talk) 20:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

<undent>When I encountered them again, I plunged ahead. I said three of the 37 people killed by TD 1 were electrocuted, though perhaps I will be struck by lightning for going by my best hunch. With TD 15, I simply changed the order of the sentences, which seemed to clarify things. Please revert these changes if they seem wrong. Finetooth (talk) 21:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I think both of those are fine :) Seddon69 (talk) 21:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey there Finetooth. A few months ago you contributed to an article I am attempting to get up to FA, The Preuss School UCSD. SandyGeorgia at the time left a number of MOS corrections to be made, and I was recently, to the best of my ability, able to make them. However, she(?) is on a break right now as is Unimaginative Username. And seeing as you seem pretty active, and from what I can see above very gracious and generous in helping out, I was wondering if you could check it out. I know a majority of the article needs a copy edit, although it seems to me that top has been given more attention than deeper into the article. Any help you can offer would be great. Either way, thanks and happy editing, SorryGuy  Talk  02:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi SorryGuy. I'll take a look and see what's up. Finetooth (talk) 04:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Congrats for doing such a great clean-up job on the Ernest Shackleton article. It reads much better now. Lazulilasher (talk) 16:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Really, your clean-up and attention to detail is commendable. Thanks again for your work on this article. Lazulilasher (talk) 16:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I enjoyed working with you on this article. Though no expert on polar expeditions, I find them fascinating and love to read about them. Finetooth (talk) 17:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For your kind efforts with this article! Your edits have greatly improved the quality of the article. Thanks very much! PeterSymonds | talk 08:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I second the comments above. You spotted small things that many other editors missed! Thankyou :) PeterSymonds | talk

Thank you for your kind words and the barnstar. I enjoyed working on the article and learned about many things that were new to me. Best of luck in pursuit of the FA. Finetooth (talk) 15:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Haha! For some reason I can't get my mind to do this right....what I tried to do was load up the article into MSWORD and then use the UK spelling dictionary--but even that doesn't seem to work correctly. Thanks for the offer to help, any assistance is appreciated. I think I've gotten most spelling to the UK norms, but I cannot be sure as the incorrect spellings down stand-out to my American eyes ;) Anyway, thanks for your help (again). Let's just go through the list together and we'll scratch out what we complete. Lazulilasher (talk) 18:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. I had forgotten who Mrs. Chippy was, but now I see. Finetooth (talk) 18:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Official congratulations - glad to see our paths crossing again. Keep up the good excellent work, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Very glad to be of service - I too have a fascination for Shackleton and find it simply amazing what he and his men accomplished. I am glad to say this was my fourth GA review and the first I passed (well deserved). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, well this was great news! Thanks for everyone's hard word. About the png file--I think it is a perfect addition to the article and would be happy to provide translation. Do you know how to edit the file? Lazulilasher (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on the file today, learning how to use MS Paint to add words like South Pole in English to the map. I'm experiencing all sorts of beginner frustration with unfamiliar software, but I'm learning. When I get far enough along that I have something worthwhile to show, I'll send you an update, and you can have a look. The French map has more detail than we need, I think, and I'll aim for a simpler version that won't be so exacting or take as long. Finetooth (talk) 18:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

As someone who still works with Paint a lot, you might also be interested in Paint.net, which is shareware and lets you rotate by any amount and add layers, plus lots of other tricks. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

<undent>Thanks for this tip. I haven't faced the rotation question yet, but I can see that it would be handy. As for layers, oh yow, I think I need a hands-on lesson. I'm proceeding by baby steps, pleased not to have fallen on my nose more than 10 times getting from the high chair to the kitchen table. Finetooth (talk) 19:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I usually work in a scratch file much bigger than the final map with lots of room on the edges to write words, then cut and paste them into the map as labels. I also usually have a blank version of the map saved (sometimes in a corner of the scratch file) so if I screw up a label etc. I have the original map to fall back on for repairs. I use the http://factfinder.census.gov maps for the US as they are public domain and fairly tweakable. See User:Ruhrfisch/Resources#Making_Maps if interested. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. I've been looking at your user page for handy tips but had not discovered the trick of the larger-than-necessary scratch file. That's a good idea. It's much easier to drag the labels into position, I'm discovering, than to try to place the text box in exactly the right position at the start. Cut-and-paste sounds even better. Meanwhile, while consulting on-line maps for geographic details, I found the French map with a key translated into English on the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition page. I hadn't noticed it before. I'm plunging ahead anyway since the labels on the French map are still in French. I need to learn how to do this. Off in the distance I see imaginary canal maps for my Pennsylvania Canal series. Finetooth (talk) 19:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, just wanted to say that I think the map looks spectacular. Great work. I like it very well in the section, as well. Plus, it has the positive effect of demonstrating the actual distances travelled. Nice job. My friend has a copy of a book published containing all of Hurley's photographs from the Endurance expedition and I am going to see if I can add dates to some of the ones which we have in the article. Also, I put the article in for peer review and, as of late, have only recieved an automated script in reply. I think after a few days I'll make an attempt at nominating for FAC--it will be my first time through that process, so I'm looking forward to the criticism :) Lazulilasher (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I hope everyone's ready to do Roald Amundsen next :) hehe....I'm currently researching sources... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazulilasher (talk • contribs) 15:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you like the map. I'm pleased to have gotten past my reluctance to work through the learning-new-software phase with MS-Paint. When I catch my breath, I'll have to see if I can master "layers" in a Paint relative. I stuck to the basics, such as horizontal labels, for this one, and it really helped that someone else had already added the routes to a base map. If you see anything on the map that could be improved, please let me know. As for your plans for a peer review, great. I've created or added significantly to a few articles, but I've never taken any of them to peer review or put any up for GA or FA. I'd be interested in watching how peer review goes on an article I'm really familiar with. And, yes, I'm interested in Amundsen. I read three of Huntford's books a couple of years ago as well as some stuff about the doomed Franklin Expedition and the adventures of John Rae in the Canadian Arctic, and I found all of this fascinating. Little details boggled my mind like the fact that Amundsen at one point skied from the Arctic coast of Alaska hundreds of miles south to the nearest telegraph office to let the world know that the Norwegians had navigated the missing section of the Northwest Passage. Finetooth (talk) 16:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, the thing about peer-review is there is such a back-log that it is difficult to have a human review your article. Usually it gets done by an automated script. It's suggested to submit an article there before going to FA which, from what I hear, can be a rather intense affair. However, if we don't get a peer-review, I'll submit it to FA and let you know so we can respond to the reviewers issues. This is my first time through this process as well, so it's all rather exciting....hehe Lazulilasher (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Oooh, thanks so much! I've just put a link to your desk on my user page, rather than copying. I haven't really been gone, just lurking. I've been working on dab pages 'cause it's easier to work in smaller bits of time, which is usually what I have. I was also waiting to see how the whole new system would work. (I'm not really a trailblazer.) I'm hopeful I can get some of the proofing backlog done in the next few weeks. This stuff is crazy old. Thanks for your help! SlackerMom (talk) 17:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Finetooth. 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.

Hi Finetooth, compliments to your nice photo of the Painted Hills in Oregon and your extensive review of the Eastern Hills. It's a true pleasure to work with you to improve the article; you have a thorough understanding of geographical and geological subjects, are very polite and include extensive edit summaries. Not always do I find such pleasure in working on Wikipedia, I must say. Thanks again and we'll get another FA for your list! All the best, Tisquesusa (talk) 00:03, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

It was a real pleasure to see your Oregon caves article at FAC, a reminder of happy times when such articles used to appear regularly. I will try and give it a prose review in a few days' time; on the face of it the presentation looks excellent. Brianboulton (talk) 08:09, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm very happy to hear from you again, and a review would be most welcome. Finetooth (talk) 15:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, once again, for all of the helpful feedback regarding the Canadian Indian residential school system page. Your comments regarding the last third of the page were particularly helpful, and the restructuring they prompted helped establish a much better flow and presentation of ideas. It was great working with you! --Dnllnd (talk) 17:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Finetooth, is this one still in good shape? I'd like to run it at TFA in July. I'll leave a note in the current thread on the article's talk page. - Dank (push to talk) 18:48, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I think so, though I was not the original nominator for FA. I'm satisfied that the changes (or non-changes) discussed in the thread are OK. No other editors, including the FA nominator, have said otherwise. I will run the link checker again today to make sure that no more dead URLs have appeared since the last check, and I'll check the very recent bot changes to two citations. Finetooth (talk) 19:11, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

it isn't that I am stalking pages, but your page is on my watchlist and I saw a new article from your hand. With "not much else to do", I thought to check it out. As you I was happily surprised; a nice article about a female race driver. My mom used to race (even together with a later 24h Le Mans winner...) for a short while, so I have some affinity and decided to look up some more info in Spanish. Glad you liked my additions. I don't know if you also do GA reviews, but I have an article upcoming for that, Cesar-Ranchería Basin, as you know from me it is filled with illustrative images as I write for the visually focused majority of people, especially on geologic subjects. Articles about Law 19834X don't really need so much visual back-up... Hope it will pass, it became quite a nice article, I think. Due to the still many red links it wouldn't qualify for FA now, but that may be the next step in the coming months. If you like to throw a critical and interested eye over it, let me know. Also I will put up the Eastern Hills of Bogotá for FAC again, as the 2 weeks have passed and I still think it is eligible enough. Filling in the many blanks of the Colombian geology with new templates about volcanoes and sedimentary basins as well as a needed infobox that was missing until now. Have another infobox in preparation to be included in hundreds of articles missing a good infobox as standard "familiar" view to the right. If you like, please comment on the sedimentary basin infobox, that's why I placed it in /sandbox for now. It's still not right, missing some features showing up and the code is not too accessible for an amateur as me. All the best and keep the good articles coming! Cheers, Tisquesusa (talk) 22:26, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I wish you luck with all of these, but I'm in danger of getting overwhelmed by FAC reviews, the articles I'm working on, and other attractions on-line and off-. I won't be doing more GA reviews in the immediate future, and I know almost nothing about coding. Finetooth (talk) 01:36, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your recent edits to the Disneyland Railroad article. I noticed that you created a sandbox page with a list of potential fixes for the article. I don't know whether you are aware of it, but I nominated this article for featured article status just this week here: FA nomination. If you like, you can copy and paste the entire contents of that sandbox page into the article's FA nomination page, and I can look into implementing those recommended changes. Jackdude101 (Talk) 02:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jackdude101: Yes, that's the rough draft of my review. It's not ready yet, but I plan to continue with it tomorrow. After I've worked through the whole article, I'll go back to the beginning and read through a second time before posting my suggestions and questions. I'm glad you reverted the Main Street U.S.A. changes; seeing the reverts and your explanation, I realized I was getting tired and knocked off for the day. Back atcha tomorrow. Cheers! Finetooth (talk) 04:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Saguaro National Park 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 Knope7 -- Knope7 (talk) 16:40, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Me again. Oregon Caves National Monument and Preserve has been scheduled for the above date as today's featured article. I'd appreciate it if you could check the article one more time to make sure it's up-to-date. You're welcome but not obligated to edit the text that will appear on the Main Page; I'll be trimming it to around 1100 characters. Thanks! - Dank (push to talk) 01:32, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Great. Thank you. I'll give the article another once-over, and I'd be glad to look over the Main Page text. Finetooth (talk) 02:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Main Page text looks fine. Finetooth (talk) 02:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks much. I'm going to mention the 8th, the anniversary of the Antiquities Act, which is somewhat in the news these days. - Dank (push to talk) 02:48, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Good. I had thought of the connection but not the anniversary. Finetooth (talk) 02:51, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Do you know if Oregon Caves was the first use of the Act? - Dank (push to talk) 02:53, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Devil's Tower was the first, in 1906. See complete list. Finetooth (talk) 03:01, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Btw I got the date on the Antiquities Act wrong, but that's not a problem, this article doesn't need a date connection. - Dank (push to talk) 00:58, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Like Congrats on the Main page appearance! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, congrats! Great to see your work on the Main Page! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:37, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to you both. Finetooth (talk) 20:47, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you again for contributing your time to help review the Disneyland Railroad article. It got promoted to featured status! On that note, I also nominated the Walt Disney World Railroad, and its FA review page is here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Walt Disney World Railroad/archive1. Its review is going well, but it still needs a source review and comments on criteria 1a, 1b, and 1c, per Sarastro1. Any input that you can provide will be very helpful. Jackdude101 (Talk) 04:20, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Don't mean to step on your toes, but.... you did say you were fine if someone double-checked... Ealdgyth - Talk 19:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely fine. I'd appreciate it. Finetooth (talk) 20:31, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm impressed once again. How are you able to be so thorough? I got quite cross-eyed working my way through 317 citations. I was so happy it wasn't 417. Finetooth (talk) 20:43, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I do a lot of detail work in my "real" jobs - I do a lot of proof-reading and editing with one job and the research I do is all on horse bloodlines. I've done insane things like scan entire stud book volumes for specific names ... 900 pages or so. As for picking out the iffy sources - the more you do, the more it becomes easy to figure out what might be iffy. User:Ealdgyth/FAC cheatsheet can help, but keep in mind the lists of websites predate the change in the FA criteria to requiring "high quality" sources. As a general rule - for a website, if you don't know it is reliable, then go to the source page. See if there is a byline/author for the article. If there is - see if the site lets you click on the byline to take you to an page on the author. If there is no byline/author that's a concern. If the "about author" page looks like a myspace page instead of a serious resume, that's a concern. Then see if the website has an "about us" page. If there isn't one - that's a concern. If there is one - check it over. Ideally the site will have an editorial team that is separate from the money side. It's a bonus if the site tells you what their standards are (see www.ign.com where they have an about page AND a page setting out how they handle reviews so that people know they aren't being paid for positive reviews) that's a bonus (assuming that they are good standards). If the site is backed by a media company - is it reputable? If you're still concerned - check the reliable sources noticeboard archives for discussions on the site. If you're still having concerns - then ask the nominator what makes the site a high quality reliable source. Most of the time, it's possible to have them show you that it's fulfilling the criteria - there is NO way everyone can possibly know all the websites in the world, especially in niche subjects. On journals - articles with a doi or in one of the standard databases (Gale, JSTOR, HighBeam, ScienceDirect, etc) will be fine. For books - if you don't recognize the publisher ... click on the ISBN and see how many libraries hold it and what quality of the library it is. Books held by a lot of university libraries are going to be generally reliable and of high quality. Watch out for works classified as "juvenile" or "pictorial" or that are outside the field of the article subject. WorldCat is good for giving you subjects on a book entry so you can see if it's in the field or not. Lulu.com/Lulu Press, iUniverse, AuthorHouse, CreateSpace, PediaPress, and the like are self-publishing firms and almost always not reliable, much less high quality. Books held only by a few libraries, especially if it's only the Library of Congress, are a concern. Keep in mind that the Library of Congress is a "library of deposit" for copyright so its holdings are not really an indication of reliablitiy because in theory ALL books published in the US are supposed to be deposited with them. It helps that I'm a book collector and I sell used books as a sideline - I'm exposed to a LOT of different publishers so I have a better grasp of what is likely to be "self-published" and what isn't. If you do enough source reviews, you get a feel for what's good and what's bad so it increases your speed and ability to sift out the crap from the good stuff. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for this. I've added a link from my toolbox to your cheatsheet. This is very helpful information. Finetooth (talk) 21:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. I didn't really mean to type quite that much... sorry for the wall of text! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The article Saguaro National Park you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Saguaro National Park for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Knope7 -- Knope7 (talk) 01:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The article Saguaro National Park you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Saguaro National Park 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 Knope7 -- Knope7 (talk) 03:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Finetooth. Hope all's well. I was wondering if you might have any time to provide feedback for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Barry Voight/archive1, which has stalled in the past week or so. I would appreciate any and all commentary you have time/availability to offer. Thanks, ceranthor 18:21, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Ceranthor. I'm swamped at the moment, but I might have time on Sunday. Finetooth (talk) 19:28, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Whenever you get the chance is totally appreciated. Thanks! ceranthor 15:51, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't know if video game characters are your thing, but you are a level-headed sort of chap, and I wonder if you care to chip in at this FAC. There has been a little bit of dispute over content, and some fresh eyes would be good. The FAC takes a bit of reading, so I understand if you are too busy. Hope you are well. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:54, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm sending a message to everyone who supported or opposed at the original nomination. Just letting you know after addressing the concerns raised at the first FAC I have renominated the article again: See here. Your comments would be most welcome, and I would be happy to review something for you in return. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 08:37, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'm a long-term Oregonian from Curry County. I was perusing your page regarding the Rogue River and in the article I believe you state that the only fossils found in Oregon are found at the Otter Point formation. Did I misunderstand your intent? The John Day Fossil Beds are world-famous (as im sure you know) and so I suspect this was an oversight or possibly a misreading by me (tis early :). Cheers! GBexpat (talk) 11:19, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest and your note. The Rogue River article says, "Oregon's only dinosaur fragments, those of a hadrosaur or duck-billed dinosaur, were found here," in the Otter Point Formation. The fossils at the John Day Fossil Beds are from the Age of Mammals, which followed the extinction of the dinosaurs. Finetooth (talk) 16:57, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

I noticed the O used your image but attributed to Restore Oregon. Aboutmovies (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Saguaro National Park article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 21, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 21, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:39, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:12, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

== BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 16:48, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Congrats on getting to the Main Page (again!) And a belated happy new year. Shannon [ Talk ] 04:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Wow, congrats on the Main page appearance! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:54, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:42, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi I just wanted to say thank you for writing the Signpost entry about common issues in Peer Review. This was very useful. It helped me spot several things I can fix before doing a peer review. Thanks! --Culix (talk) 03:53, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed you commented at Jill Valentine's FAC1, which was a long time ago, so I understand if you don't want to get involved again (or even remember commenting in the first place). But JV's FAC3 was dismissed on the basis that I hadn't contacted previous commentators, so I've gone through all previous FACs and "peer reviews" and tried my best to address any issue which had ever been raised. I'm happy with the article as it is now (in that I believe it meets the featured article criteria), but I'd appreciate any feedback from any previous commentator. Is there something I could improve before renominating? Would you be into commenting at FAC4? I'd ideally like to address every issue anyone may have before renominating, so the FAC can be as uneventful as possible. ;) I'd appreciate your feedback, if you have the time. Cheers. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:53, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

You've been excellent help reviewing a couple of articles of mine before, and I'm looking for someone without much (or any) cricket knowledge to take a look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Worcestershire v Somerset, 1979/archive1, which I'm hoping to take on to Featured status. Any help you could provide would be amazing. Thanks, Harrias ^talk 09:33, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for the reply. Harrias ^talk 18:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Quick facts

Close

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019

a time for thanks and praise

begin it with music and memories

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. I wanted that for 1 January, but then wasn't sad about having our music pictured instead. Not too late for resolutions, New Year or not. DYK that he probably kept me on Wikipedia, back in 2012? By the line (which brought him to my attention, and earned the first precious in br'erly style) that I added to my editnotice, in fond memory? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:28, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Why do you add these pushpin maps of California that just take up space and don't clarify anything? Perhaps if there's a pushpin map of the county it would do something useful. Dicklyon (talk) 05:57, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

The short answer to your question is that the guidelines for maps in river articles begins with this sentence: "Every river article should include a map." The map doesn't have to be a pushpin map, and many river articles include other kinds of maps. Finetooth (talk) 19:10, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

OK, that's just silly project aspiration; it's certainly far from a guideline. Maybe a small map at the bottom if you must. But a big map up top that's uninformative is useless. (let's keep the conversation here where it started) Dicklyon (talk) 04:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Hey Finetooth, I hope you are doing well. I noticed you were selectively removing "United States" links from leads in river articles since I have a ton on my watchlist. I was confused when you removed the link to United States in Kootenay River but left the link for Canada. according to MOS:OVERLINK shouldn't "Canada" also be removed? I don't understand why just the USA... Shannon [ Talk ] 16:52, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes. You are right about Canada, and I should also be looking for things like Pacific Ocean and North America. Thanks for the heads-up. Finetooth (talk) 06:21, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok - I'm just not familar with the overlink policy so I was a bit befuddled thinking "it seems kind of US centric". Sorry for the confusion. Shannon [ Talk ] 06:25, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

This is to let you know that Lock Haven, Pennsylvania has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 18 February 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 18, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:21, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Ealdgyth. The article looks fine to me and so does the main page text. Finetooth (talk) 18:58, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Your Fossil, OR image is being used but lacks attribution. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, Finetooth, and welcome to Women in Red. It's good to have such an experienced editor as a new member, especially as you are interested in covering women writers. As it happens, Women Writers is one of our priorities for September. I see you've already created Elizabeth Fenwick Way and that you are working on a couple more. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 07:24, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

George Bellows, North River (1908), Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts.		Best wishes for a healthy and prosperous 2020.
		Thank you for your contributions toward making Wikipedia a better and more accurate place. BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 13:47, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

rem notice

Hi Finetooth,

I see you gave some excellent suggestions on the Mumbai article 11 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Mumbai/archive3 I recently fixed most of the issues pointed out by you. Can you check it and review again if possible and suggest what more improvements can be made in the article?

This is the new PR: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Mumbai/archive4

Amazingcaptain (talk) 09:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Amazingcaptain: Sorry. I am no longer doing peer reviews. Best of luck with the article. Finetooth (talk) 17:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Edward Hines Lumber Co. logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Quick facts Five years! ...

Precious

Five years!

Close

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:02, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda. It's a pleasure working with you. Finetooth (talk) 13:47, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you four the uplift, and for today's Oregon Caves National Monument and Preserve, "unusual marble cave and its surrounds, which lie in a remote sector of the Siskiyou Mountains"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:35, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Today: Columbia River, "This article has been the subject of a broad and sustained collaboration by over a dozen editors since at least 2007. The river is of central importance to America's Pacific Northwest region: cultural, economic, transportation, environmental, and international political interests have intersected along the river for centuries, and it played an important role in the area's geologic evolution and native culture as well." Thank you, and the many involved! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:55, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

When should Bryant be TFA? Her birthday? Or next March, women's month? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:43, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I think women's month is a great idea. Finetooth (talk) 21:57, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Louise Bryant --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for valuable comments to improve Der 100. Psalm, now promoted to FA on the day it was mentioned on the Main page ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for Saguaro National Park, "a two-district national park near Tucson, Arizona, that preserves large stands of giant saguaro cacti and other desert vegetation, much of it barbed, and a wide variety of animals that run like javelinas, crawl like zebra-tailed lizards, fly like whiskered screech owls, or hang out near water like lowland leopard frogs." - I love both, the park and the article! - Best wishes for your health! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for Louise Bryant on IWD, - I made her a meaningful part of my talk today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:16, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Six years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:13, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Today, thank you for Lock Haven, Pennsylvania, "a small university town that grew up along the West Branch Canal of the Pennsylvania Canal system in the early 19th century. Until William Penn's original woods were mostly felled, the town thrived on timber. In the 1930s, the town became home to Piper Aircraft and its famous Cub. In the 1970s, flooding from the remnants of Hurricane Agnes put a big damper on the airplane factory and much else in town. Beneath part of the city lie artifacts from other cultures dating back more than 8,000 years."! - I have a peer review open, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:45, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Eight years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Jerome, Arizona article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 11, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 11, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:03, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations, Finetooth, on Jerome, Arizona being today's TFA. It is a fascinating article and a welcome contribution. Ergo Sum 03:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Quick facts Ten years! ...

Awesome

Ten years!

Close

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you today for Jerome, Arizona, "about the boom and bust town of Jerome, Arizona, site of two of the richest copper deposits ever discovered. William A. Clark, one of the Copper Kings of Montana, owned the first, and James Douglas, Jr., a friend of Georges Clemenceau, owned the second. Both men financed mines, railroads, smelters, and company towns (Clarksville and Clemenceau) in or near Jerome. When the mines played out, the workers left, and Jerome's population shrank from about 5,000 in 1930 to about 250 in 1960. Today the town is home to about 450 people who rely mainly on a tourist economy."! - Missing Jerome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Hope you're doing well and staying safe. Thought you might enjoy Stone House (Portland, Oregon). Happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Quick facts Nine years! ...

Precious

Nine years!

Close

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:06, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Finetooth! Would you care to do a FAC review for Manganese, Minnesota? I don't know if it's Wiki-appropriate to recruit reviewers, but you have reviewed articles I have written before, and the FAC coordinators are suggesting that this article is likely to be archived if no other reviewers step up to the plate. I know your talk page states that you are largely inactive, so I will ask some other previous reviewers as well. Thanks! DrGregMN (talk) 13:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda. Glad you are still going strong. Finetooth (talk) 01:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I found out about Crane Union High School and expanded the article accordingly. If you have plans to be in that part of eastern Oregon to take photos, would it be OK if I started a photo request list?

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for expanding the Crane Union High School article. I'm largely retired from Wikipedia and do not think I will be in the vicinity of Crane in the future. Best wishes. Finetooth (talk) 20:35, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Finetooth,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:10, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:10, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

	Women in Red 8th Anniversary
	In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The article Dant, Oregon has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable location. The article contains a fair amount of information, but it is mostly SYNTH from sources that don't talk about this place at all, or only confirm that it existed (references 1 and 2). I can't find a single mention of Dant from the archives of the Wasco County press (except for people with that last name), and as far as books, the best I can find is , which only mentions the perlite mine "at Dant". Satellite view shows a cluster of buildings along the railroad tracks, but without any access roads into this remote area; these are probably just ruins of the mine. With no information about a "community" of Dant (as opposed to the mine) this isn't a notable enough place for an article; fails WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 03:01, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

The article Rutledge, Oregon has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable location. This source, on page 484: clearly states this was just a post office. From the satellite view: , it is plainly obvious this is not a community in any sense of the term. Fails WP:GEOLAND.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 13:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

I have no reason to object. GNIS, OGN, and a road map were all I ever found; they seemed sufficient at the time. Thanks for your work. Finetooth (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

The article Globe, Oregon has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sourced only to GNIS and maps. Does appear that there was once more there than at present: , but no information could be found; no mentions in the illustrated history of Lane County. Without sources this is a failure of WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:12, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

OK by me. Finetooth (talk) 00:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Franklin's lost expedition has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 09:52, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Havana, Oregon, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Havana, Oregon until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 18 June 2024 (UTC)