User talk:Lukobe
|
|
Wikipedia:MediaWiki namespace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style
Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149
Goodness gracious - Seattle is in good hands! That "Founding" heading was just what it needed. I will watch your flow of contributions with interest. :robinp 00:44, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MediaWiki_custom_messages
| Contents |
Moving articles
Lukobe, you moved Cogswell Polytechnical College to Cogswell College since that appears to be the (currently) correct name of the school. However, it appears you did this simply by cutting and pasting the text of the article to the new article. By doing this, you've sacrificed the entire edit history for the article. While this is not a tragedy for such a small article, it can be dire for large articles with a long edit history. For future reference, if you move articles again, use the "Move this page" link. Using this method, it will preserve the history for the article as well as move the associated talk page. Take care! —Frecklefoot 15:20, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)
- Nice work on Eternal Sunshine. Can you do 50 First Dates next, please? :-) --Uncle Ed 21:39, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
OK, when I refreshed my memory by looking at a map, I realized that Elliott Bay and Lake Washington squeezing in in the middle is probably at least 60% of the problem, so I generalized it some, although it's now a little wordier. Basically, at least for a straight road (ie following the grid), it's pretty much limited to the area of the Montlake Cut--a street between Lake Union and Portage Bay would run into the Duwamish, adding the cost of a second bridge. And, indeed, if you include Lake City Way, and MLK Way, 23rd/25th does indeed come closest to qualifying (as connecting N boundary to S). (I don't feel strongly about having the explanation here, I just added it to answer the question that I thot many readers would have.)
As for Madison being the only E<>W, the offset downtown grid doesn't help, bodies of water play a part, tho' not as much (even tho' the Duwamish is generally narrow enuf for a bridge, there aren't going to be many built). Hills probably do make up most of the rest of the reason (at least besides the fact the probably no one really made it a goal). I assume the reason Madison does is related to the ferry it used to serve that crossed Lake Washington, tho' I don't know offhand which came first. (Yesler probably would also be one, except the for the hill on the east end.)
PS I like your additions to the layout article (I don't have any Seattle/King County street maps down here [but ordered a King Co Thomas Guide earlier today], so I was mostly going from memory about which cities, although I should have remembered Shoreline, since I lived there a few years, and Mercer Island, since my dad worked there about 20 yrs), and THANK YOU for fixing "road label"--I knew it was bad, but was having a mental block as to how to fix it. Oh, and leaving out "numbering" there is fine.
PPS Turns out the road preceded the ferry[1] (http://www.historylink.org/_output.CFM?file_ID=3471), which wasn't planned at the time, so they're less connected than I thot. I guess the reason is that the street was made by someone that wanted the connection, and owned enuf land he could do it, and did it back when it was still possible; probably a rare combination. Niteowlneils 20:20, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Since you've done such a good job of cleaning up some of my other contributions, I wanted to let you know I just added an article about Husky Stadium--feel free to add/correct anything. Niteowlneils 17:29, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I've been adding to each of the state boxes the 20 largest municipalities in each state -- depending on the state, the size of the 20th largest cities varies widely; in Texas, it's over 100k, in Montana, less than 5k. You're probably right major cities isn't the best term to use. I think I'll probably change those to "largest cities" or something similar. - Seth Ilys 06:10, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the copyedit on Seattle Central Library. I always get nervous after I post an article if someone doesn't come along and give it a once (or twice) over. -- Scarequotes 23:47, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
Seattle
Nice job on the Seattle, Washington intro section -- that's pretty much what I'd been thinking of, but I haven't had time to sit down and really go over the article the way it deserves. I think striving for Featured Article status is an excellent goal. -- Scarequotes 18:25, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the copyediting work on my recent changes. In your edit of Green River (Washington) you changed "multi-use" to "multiuse". I had just been following the usage on the trails article and from the web it looks like both are in wide use. Is there a reason for the preference? -- wac 18:24, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
In re: your question about Featured Article status: I really haven't looked at the main Seattle article in a while, just assumed it is in good hands. From your question, I suppose it's time for me to take a look at it soon. (Good timing, because I just finished my paid project and may have some time on my hands the next few weeks. Unless someone hires me quick...) -- Jmabel 06:59, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)
- OK, so I looked, made an edit, reverted it, and made another that I hope is seen as "friendly". It's a good article. I myself would be neutral on making it a Featured Article. Plus side: it's dense as all get-out. This must be one of the most link-dense long articles we've got. It obviously is the tip of a well-researched iceberg. Minus side: Consequently, a lot of it reads like lists instead of prose. That may simply be inevitable. Maybe some of the more list-y sections could use an introductory sentence or two of prose? Or maybe not.
- Anyway, the quality is high, but Featured Article tends to go to more interesting pieces of writing, and we simply have too much material to make our top-level article all that prose-y. -- Jmabel 07:44, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)
I don't see any misspellings with the words 'white populous', however it may be misused in this instance, but the final edit looks good enough to put it to a rest.--67.0.141.232 19:59, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
UW Rewrite
Thanks for your edits to User:Jkiang/University of Washington rewrite. I was actually going to ask you to take a look at it, since you've done a great job editing some of my related articles. I guess I'll be folding it in to the main article soon. It really needs some nice photos, but I don't really have any worthy.--Jkiang 23:49, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I guess you're right about it being ready, so I went ahead and put it in. Thanks for the help.--Jkiang 02:41, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
May Department Stores detail
Thank you for your very good research on May Company, as I've known it for years and years. The subsidiaries and their info is very good - looks like you are an editorial "polisher" and researcher, as I also am.
One question: In my research on Wanamaker's, I found that the original flagship store of Wanamaker's in Philadelphia, PA was renamed Lord & Taylor in 1995. (Then I lost the source somehow. . .) Could you verify that with me and state as such on the May article page (adding it to the New York City Lord and Taylor's). Let me know if you need any input from me. Thanks in advance for your looking into this some more. --avnative 17:55, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for the wonderful message! As far as I know, there are only two Lord & Taylor's in the world: one in New York City, the other (from all appearances) seems to be in Philly at the site of the old original Wanamaker's Dept. Store. I guess I'll make a long distance call there to verify and footnote. . . (smile)
- I really appreciate you stating your work with Amazon.com as a copyedit kind of person. I've long thought this might be the right kind of job for me. If you had any pointers on how to break in to this kind of work, I'd love to hear from you more on it. I can't relocate elsewhere, though. I am in Los Angeles County, California though - maybe that might be something useful to some company somehow in the market for copyeditor folks. Happy Trails, --avnative 21:05, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
- Lukobe, your short vignette about how you "broke in" to your current work and the link you provided was just what I was looking for from you. Many kind and gracious thanks! I'll be checking this out with due diligence in the immediate future. --avnative 21:27, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
Seattle meetup
Hi, Jwrosenzweig and I are organizing a Seattle meetup and wanted to let you know in case you're interested in attending. See our talk pages for the discussion so far. We're tentatively planning to have the meetup on November 6th, so if you want to come but that date is problematic for you, please let me know. --Michael Snow 21:57, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)| talk) 19:10, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
SMiLE and belated greetings
Hi Lukobe -- sorry it took so long to respond to your greeting. And yes, you are correct -- I am a Chalkillian.
Thanks for your(?) earlier work on SMiLE -- have had lots of fun adding to it (hope you didn't mind -- I've been rather obsessed with it of late). It's certainly a rewarding feeling to see it selected as a Featured Article. Cheers! -- dunks58
January 15 Seattle meetup
Just wanted to let you know we are planning another Seattle meetup on January 15, 2005. We're trying to get a sense of who will attend, so please drop by that page & leave a note. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:59, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)
Seattle article
Re Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#How_does_this_resolve.3F: does Raul correctly understand that you do not support Seattle as a featured article? And, if he is correct, what do you think needs to happen to get it there? -- Jmabel | Talk 06:04, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)
- Looks like next time I need to canvass for support. Oh, well. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:15, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
- Regarding your question about why i put that borders on racism buddy in the comment in my most recent edit of Seattle, Washington, here's my reasoning:
- This is an encyclopedia, wordings such as whitest, blackest to describe people are just not polite in the view of the general public, and i believe that's why over the years media have changed their wording to 'African-American, Latin-American, Chinese-American', etc. If you were to call a city 'blackest', what does that imply? Of course the definition of racism may be very different from person to person, but in my opinion comparing 'white-ness' of a city is not very appropriate, especially in an encyclopedia of Wiki's nature. LG-犬夜叉 11:40, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)
Seattle Maps
Thanks. The Census Bureau web site has a nice tool for maps (http://factfinder.census.gov/jsp/saff/SAFFInfo.jsp?_pageId=gn7_maps). I used a street-level zoom to mark the boundaries (based on the article text and City Clerk map) then copied it on to the full city map. --Tradnor 04:07, 24 May 2005 (UTC)