User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2016/May

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

Hi Epicgenius. Thanks for giving me your message. I do appreciate you editing the R62 and R62A page. However, I do think that a gallery section is better, as I believe having so many images on the side does not make the page look good on the desktop. I personally prefer a gallery section for more than 2 images to display.m on a page.

Maybe having the images on the side is better, but I think I like it this way better. You can change it back if you want, but I honestly prefer a gallery section for the pages.

Thanks, Davidng913

@Davidng913: I understand. But we should put at least one image on the side to illustrate the topic, then put the rest of the images in the gallery section. (On a narrow desktop, the image on the side will be moved to between the side of the page and the infobox.) epicgenius (talk) 01:56, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: I get what your saying. Thank you.

I know that it is a long way away from becoming a good article, but I still want to find a way to improve it. With such a rich and fascinating history, I don't know how the article isn't very good. I want to improve it, but I need some help finding somewhere to start. Thanks!--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:15, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

@Kew Gardens 613: Sure, we can go for Good Article status on that article, too. How about starting with the "History" section? I suggest that we improve History of the Long Island Rail Road first, then tackle the main article later. epicgenius (talk) 16:24, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Right now I am fixing links that are intended for Long Island Rail Road, but instead go to Long Island Railroad, or LIRR. --Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:26, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

I come here to ask for help again. Can you review it? I think you'll like the article. Some sentences may need paraphrasing. I'm still learning how to do it properly. Triplecaña (talk) 13:24, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

@Triplecaña: I'll look it over later. Thanks, epicgenius (talk) 14:56, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Can we have a discussion to establish consensus over the infobox images for the subway routes? Not just which image to use, but the whole "front of the train" verses "entire length of the train" debate. It seems that it has been a topic of contention over past few weeks. Or months. @Kew Gardens 613: Tdorante10 (talk) 11:17, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

@Tdorante10: Sure. Do you want to open a discussion at WT:NYCS, where we can open a request for comments? epicgenius (talk) 12:30, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Sounds good. Tdorante10 (talk) 23:19, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to St. John's University (New York City) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:12, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Astoria, Queens may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * [[Cyndi Lauper] (born 1953), singer, songwriter, actress, LGBT activist

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:19, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Hey, Epicgenius – I wouldn't mind an unbiased set of eyes over at List of United States light rail systems by ridership‎ and its Talk page. I respect your opinion, so... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:54, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Sure, I will look at it later. (And thanks! It's nice to have my opinion be respected.) epicgenius (talk) 21:58, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

I am, finally, at long last, done with Archibald Cox, and you are free to copy edit the whole thing if you want.

I will be returning to John Francis Hylan, but I have to first reacquaint myself with my notes (which are not as organized as I would have liked), but when I get it together it will be full steam ahead. Cheers. AnthroMimus (talk) 21:36, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

@AnthroMimus: Thank you for all your hard work on that article. And thank you for the message. I'll make a note of it for later, as I am currently a little busy. Regards, epicgenius (talk) 00:01, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Many thanks for your attention to Archibald Cox. 2 questions: 1) does the template "sfn|..." = "ref + template harvnb|... + /ref"? 2) Did you read article? What do you think overall? One note: I believe Harvard considers a "University Professorship" a proper noun clause with initial caps. See http://www.harvard.edu/about-harvard/harvard-glance/about-faculty/university-professorships. Cheers AnthroMimus (talk) 22:51, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

@AnthroMimus: 1) Yes. 2) I read part of the article. I think it's well formatted and well written, though I still may need to make some punctuation corrections (minor changes). Also, "University Professorship" is indeed capitalized; thank you for pointing that out. Finally, have you considered splitting the article? You may want to consider Early life of Archibald Cox, Political career of Archibald Cox, Bibliography of Archibald Cox, etc.

Thank you for your work on the article. Do you wish to nominate for good article status? I can help you if you wish. epicgenius (talk) 01:30, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Re GA: My inclination is to spend my time adding content rather than involving myself in WikiPolitics. (There seems to be a lack of people who add major chunks of content or finishing up articles.) The Archibald Cox article specifically was nominated for GA but some officious person, not involved in either the article or WikProjects Law, removed it from consideration to get his preferred article a leg up on being reviewed. I've seen how's it's done and I'm not particularly interested in doing go-fer work for a guy who knows nothing about the subject. (WikiProject Law is notorious for having reviewers who are not lawyers and not very knowledgeable about law.) That's why I suggested if we get Hylan in shape, you should propose it, because I won't. If you decide to propose this or Hylan or whatever else we're involved in, I'd help you, but not a reviewer with an agenda. As for breaking up the article, it seems to me that it would be odd to create more than one article about it, given that WikiProject Law says it's of Low Importance, when a Level 4 article like Thomas Jefferson is not broken into parts. There would be problems in splitting it up as well. E.g., some of the bibliography is referred to in notes, later parts refer back to earlier, etc. But whatever happens, happens. I'm pretty much done with this article, which was a detour and I did not intend to re-write the whole thing (which I ended up doing). I only got involved because I saw that one part of it had some glaring errors. Then one thing led to another and I decided to finish the thing. Time to move back to Brooklyn politics at the turn of the 20th century. Cheers AnthroMimus (talk) 03:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

@AnthroMimus: About the GA: I think the nomination failed (it wasn't removed for consideration by an officious editor; it was simply failed due to the article expansion not being complete at the time) because you were still editing at the time. But it looks like your expansion of this article is complete. I will most probably nominate Cox and Hylan in the near future, after we polish it up; you can be a co-nominator with me and take all the credit for your hard work. Thanks again, epicgenius (talk) 13:31, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

@Epicgenius:: When the person withdrew the nomination on Cox, he put back into the queue at WikiProject Law a nomination for a Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the previous editor withdrew and which was in the midst of an edit war. It was clearly a case that he wanted his preferred article to receive faster review. You can see all this by reading the entries at the GA1 and GA2 pages of that article. Don't nominate Hylan until we're finished (which at the moment is a long way off). As I said, if you want to nominate Cox, do so, but I won't be part of it. I will however help you behind-the-scenes if you like. This is for the general reasons I said before, and because of my considered opinion that time spent promoting Wikipedia articles is wasted (and the "grading" of an article is meaningless). As for "credit," I am perhaps too old to understand how the internet generation takes any pride in things attributed to their anonymous avatars on websites. So I am not motivated by that. But if you are, I am more than happy to help you get the credit, because of how helpful you have been. Best. AnthroMimus (talk)

@AnthroMimus: Regarding the shenanigans with the GA withdrawal: I see what happened now. Thanks for clarifying that up. As for nominations, I will probably do so in the future, but I am going to be very busy until next week. Finally, in regards to credit, it's an unofficial system of rankings, but it nevertheless provides attribution to the person who has done most of the improvements to the article.

I still think you should be attributed (I don't want to take all the attribution to myself, because that would be selfish). If you don't want to be attributed, it's okay, but I want people to know the very good work you've put into these articles recently, and I hope you are thinking about contributing even more to other related articles. It always helps the encyclopedia as a whole. Regards, epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Do you think a nearly finished building could achieve FAC status following FA criteria? I've written a complete and referenced article about a building which is topped out but it is uninhabited and the gardens, pools and such have not been installed. es:Intempo. I mean if it includes up-to-date information, it shouldn't be a problem right? I can't also find reviews of the skyscraper architecture and I say so in the FAC page. Thanks for your time, I also respect your opinion Triplecaña (talk) 15:58, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@Triplecaña: Thanks, it's good to have my opinion respected by you too. Unfortunately, I don't know if Spanish FAC criteria are the same as English, but you should probably give it a shot. Not much harm can come out of this, anyway. epicgenius (talk) 16:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

…even for a moment, into the ongoing heated debate on tagging at articles, which continues with some warmth (as in heat) at my Talk page. I hope that discussion remains productive—philosophical, gounded in the policies and guidelines and their interpretation, as well as practical, with examination and feedback regarding ongoing current edits. If the matter of article appearance vs. quality of content, and the rigourous question of when tagging is appropriate or not, interests you, feel free and dive in at my Talk page (it is a long section with ANI in the title). Otherwise, Cheers, hope all is well, and look forward to future cordial collaborations/interactions. User:Le Prof_7272 50.129.227.141 (talk) 03:13, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps this is where we first crossed paths? See "Elizabethans…" here.  ; ) Le Prof 50.129.227.141 (talk) 03:20, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@Leprof 7272: No problem. I'll probably look at it over the weekend. epicgenius (talk) 03:28, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Individualized Education Program, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Public school. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Wednesday May 25, 6pm: WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon. This month's WikiWednesday Salon, we'll meet and share with the MediaWiki software development community, through a community learning night at NYU on May 25. Wednesday May 25 at NYU Tisch School of Arts, 721 Broadway, 4th floor (same location as Wikipedia Day in January) - WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). 6:00 pm: Introduction, pizza 7:00 pm: MediaWiki tutorial, community involvement and extension ideas, novel uses of wiki technology 8:00 pm: State of the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikipedia / Wikimedia community 9:00 pm: Monthly WikiSalon in San Francisco video-link, casual bicoastal chat Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 13:49, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Hello! Your submission of South Jamaica Houses at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 03:35, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Greetings, Epicgenius! I have been thinking, and I know you edit World Trade Center-related topics as much as I do, and I was wondering if you wanted to possibly start a World Trade Center (1973-2001) WikiProject? I think it would be fun and I think we could get enough members to join it. Please let me know what you think. Cheers! CookieMonster755 ^{📞 ✉ ✓} 17:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

@CookieMonster755: Long time no see! How've you been? Anyway, we can definitely create such a wikiproject, though its scope would need to be a lot bigger. Wikipedia:WikiProject September 11, 2001 already covers most of the old World Trade Center's articles. But a Wikipedia:WikiProject Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, or a generic WTC wikiproject, might cover a lot of articles pretty well without a near-total overlap with WP:9/11. Let me know what you think about this. Regards, epicgenius (talk) 22:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

It's good to see ya, too! I have been doing good. Just got unblocked last month for sock puppetry, but now I am a good editor. Let me first of by saying, a PANYNJ WikiProject would be kind of awkward. Yes, there is a lot of PANYNJ articles, but I personally would not support a WikiProject for it. Now that I am thinking, we could create a World Trade Center task-force under the 9/11 WikiProject, but at the same time, it would be problematic, because not everything associated with the WTC would be associated with 9/11. I personally think a separate WTC WikiProject would be great! You could be head chief ;) let me know what you think, and if you need a deeper explanation, let me know. I don't want to confuse you, hehe :P Cheers! CookieMonster755 ^{📞 ✉ ✓} 01:14, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@CookieMonster755: I'm sorry to learn that you were blocked. Good to have you back though. If WP:PANYNJ doesn't work, then I agree with the idea of a WP:WTC wikiproject, covering both World Trade Centers. That way, this task force is more comprehensive. Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium (formerly epicgenius) (talk) 13:08, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

No need to be sorry, it was my fault :P Anyway, please check out the WikiProject Proposal for a WTC WikiProject: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/World Trade Center. Thanks, CookieMonster755 ^{📞 ✉ ✓} 19:41, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited R110B (New York City Subway car), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PATCO. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

I have been busy adding references and I have been adding content in sections where it has been lacking. I know some areas need more content and some areas need more references. I think that some of the sections could now become their own articles. More advice would be appreciated. If possible could you help with this? Thanks again. --Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:49, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

@Kew Gardens 613: Sure. There seem to be seven main sections for this article (Gateway to Boston, 1832–1840s; Local focus, 1840s–1875; Competition and consolidation on Long Island, 1854–1880; Austin Corbin years, 1880–1900; Pennsylvania Railroad ownership, 1900–1949; Lean years, 1949–1966; and State ownership, 1966–present). Based on these, I suggest Early history of the Long Island Railroad, Expansion of the Long Island Railroad, and Recent history of the Long Island Railroad or something. I will look more into detail later. Regards, Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium (formerly epicgenius) (talk) 03:31, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?

1. Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
2. Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
3. Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:02, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Epicgenius. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/South Jamaica Houses.
Message added 16:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Self reminder to do two QPQs for DYK. Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium (formerly epicgenius) (talk) 16:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC) Self reminder again Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium (formerly epicgenius) (talk) 19:00, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Outside reminder this time. Please give this your top priority: the nomination is the oldest outstanding one at DYK, and needs to be completed soon. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: Thanks for the outside reminders. I should have the DYK reviews done by this weekend. It shouldn't take me long. Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium (formerly epicgenius) (talk) 21:58, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

THIS IS A REMINDER FOR MYSELF TO DO THE QPQs TODAY. IT SHOULD TAKE LESS THAN AN HOUR. Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium (formerly epicgenius) (talk) 12:42, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

 Done Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium (formerly epicgenius) (talk) 19:18, 31 May 2016 (UTC)