User talk:Jim.henderson/archive 3

For archived versions, see User talk:Jim.henderson/archive 1 and User talk:Jim.henderson/archive 2

My talk page is for getting into contact with me. Put your comments at the end, in a new section if it isn't about whatever's in the latest section. I will reply on this page under the assumption that you have put it on your watchlist. For replying to something I put in your talk page, or about a particular article which I edited recently, better to reply there, since I have watchlisted it.

Telecommunications Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I thought this item worth saving from last year's version of my talk page:

Why did you remove the pizzeria catergory from the Grimaldi's Pizzeria page? I know that you gave an explation in your edit summary but I didn't understand it. Could you explain it to me?--Fantastic fred (talk) 20:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grandparental categories. Categories have parent cats and, often, child cats. Those parent cats have parents of their own, and child cats may have children of their own to take care of details. There are many thousands of pizzerias and putting all of them in Category:pizzerias wouldn't help much in finding them. Instead, that category has a child Category:Pizzerias by country which has a child Category:Pizzerias of the United States which has a child Category:Pizza chains of the United States which has Grimaldi's Pizzeria.

An article that belongs in a child category, generally does not belong in that cat's parent categories, grandparents, great-grandparents, great-great or whatever since the children are taking care of the article and readers who seek more can pull the chain of categories to find them. Parental categories should have, besides their child cats, articles that don't belong to any of those child cats. There are exceptions, but as far as I see, that lovely little pizzeria at which I ate the summer before last isn't one of them.

You might want to consider Category:Actors as an example. It wouldn't do much good if it directly included everyone who ever worked in that trade, would it? Instead, it has child cats for various kinds of actors. Jim.henderson (talk) 21:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. You've been very helpful.--Fantastic fred (talk) 15:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a mailing list created for Wikipedians in the New York metropolitan area (list: Wikimedia NYC). Please consider joining it! Cbrown1023 talk 21:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I was a kid I played with large dry cells about 7" long and 2.5" in diameter. They had 2 screw terminals on the carbon rod and the zinc container. Were these the No 6 cells you referred to for use "in the subscriber's telephone"? If not, what were the kind I descried? Greensburger (talk) 17:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me, too. Sorry; I don't know and merely saw the paragraph in Telephone exchange and wondered whether we had a Dry cell article. My guess is, yes the same cells were used in doorbells, magneto telephones, and to inspire little nerds in the middle 20th century, and I think hardware stores including Home Depot still sell similar units. Alas, our Dry cell article is mostly technical and chemical and gives little hint as to sales history. All the battery articles share that merit and that deficiency. I wish they had a link to a site oriented more to economic impact. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would match my understanding of the approximate size of the ones in the battery operated phones. As a trivia note, the military still used magneto phones in the 1990s. When we designed a custom military version of the GTD-5, we had to develop a magneto line card that would detect the foreign current surge as an off-hook indication.Kww (talk) 01:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday March 16th, Columbia University area Last: 1/13/2008 This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, and have salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).

Well also make preparations for our exciting Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, a free content photography contest for Columbia University students planned for Friday March 28 (about 2 weeks after our meeting).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

You're also invited to subscribe to the public Wikimedia New York City mailing list, which is a great way to receive timely updates.
This has been an automated delivery because you were on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, I must work that weekend and will especially miss the chance to talk to fellow shutterbugs. See you in May, or whenever. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Nycducks.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:170rainirt.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YOu need to state you made the image in the summary as well as in the licensing boilerplate :)Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boilerplate? Where is this rule written? What is the exact requirement? According to Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#Insert_Picture_and_Copyright, what it takes is a {{PD-self}} template. I did that. Precisely what else is required?

Thanks for the copyedit of Landing at Kip's Bay here. I probably meant to write "subordinates", but inexplicably used a transitive verb instead ;-) Tan | 39 23:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim. Thanks for your continuing stream of great photos of the New York area. It would be great if you signed up for an account and uploaded future photos at Commons: instead. This would allow the images to be categorized, and to be easily used on the other Wikimedia projects, such as all the different language Wikipedias. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 17:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something like a Project New York Pictures? Nice to see that this event eventually came off with some success. I worked until midnight the night before and my creaky old body doesn't get going in the morning, and I had to work Friday, so couldn't be there. Instead I unfolded my Brompton Bicycle on Sunday, pedalled over the Queensboro Bridge and set to cruising around Long Island City. Got some shots of PS1, LIC LIRR station, and Dutch Kills and its bridges. Then other bridges and tributaries of Newtown Creek, Maspeth and the south end of Elmhurst, some of which are not yet edited or otherwise ready for insertion in an article. Anyway I'd like to discuss such things in an appropriate forum, but don't know of one. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were with us in spirit, surely. And it's great to see that Queens is getting its due. Next time we're definitely going to hold it on the weekend. See Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Goals#Institutionalized for the more general part of my response.--Pharos (talk) 03:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim. In the Tip and Ring wiki the third pair colors are listed as orange and blue. I've not many years in the field but the only third pair I've seen in the "red - green" color code is the white - blue. Now these are newer "IW's" Inside Wires. Have I missed older versions? And an important question for me to ask is what variations have you seen in the red - green IW's?

Why do you think it was better before my editig? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.218.222.40 (talk) 04:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 68.218.222.40, I think you are questioning Jim Henderson's replacement of this text "It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and shares a water border with Rhode Island as well as an international border with the Canadian provinces of Quebec and Ontario." about New York. That seems to me to be reasonable information that is readily verifiable (and so is hardly an "unsourced statement" as you seemed to say when you removed it at 03:48 on 23 April 2008"). Cuddlyable3 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 11:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right. Also I'm flattered by the attention, but please, if this matter deserves further discussion, continue it at its talk page where various interested editors can see it, rather than in my talk page whose ambit is somewhat different. Also remember to log in under your account name to allow full participation. I'm in a rush now to photograph some railroads while the Sun is high, so won't comment further until darkness sends me back to the computer. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is an "ambit"? Are you talking down to me? 68.218.222.40 (talk) 03:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ambit= scope http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ambit Cuddlyable3 (talk) 09:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. People with a taste for big words may prefer bailiwick. Anyway, under the mistaken assumption that I was dealing with a well meaning newcomer who doesn't yet understand the benefits of account names, article talk pages and other Wikipedia conventions, I wasn't talking down. Aware now that this is a thoughless ninny who doesn't care to look things up, I can change that. Jim.henderson (talk) 16:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you edited this page (and expressed an interest in such a page on your user page). I've pretty much reached the limits of what I can do with the article and it'd be great if you could take it over and do what you want with it! --RegentsPark (talk) 19:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The construction sign made me pause and await a mass of construction, but since that isn't happening, I'll add more to the article later in the week. Not early in the week because I've been, well, bicycling a lot in New York including Five Boro Bike Tour yesterday and not keeping up with other matters. Tomorrow will be half as much milage, but later when I've uploaded some of last week's and yesterday's pictures, there will be time to expand an article with words. It is difficult to stay indoors at the keyboard when sunny days beckon me to the road. Got plenty to say; just no great supply of references, so my material will be rich in links to articles already in Wikipedia. Jim.henderson (talk) 22:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I saw the Bicycling in Chicago article and figured that New York is so much more interesting as a bike city. My extent of biking is taking the kids out to Riverside Park (they are very young) and biking up and down till we all get tired! --RegentsPark (talk) 22:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, I added a fair amount tonight but the quality is not up to par. I'll fix it up somewhat, this weekend if nobody beats me to it, and add some external links for the local orgs, NYCDoT and whatever I think of. Saturday at 1PM I expect to be at the Small Wheels bicycle race in Bethesda Terrace. Anybody who takes the kids or otherwise gets there, look for an old guy with white beard, blue jacket, brown shorts, black Brompton Bicycle, and little camera bag dangling from my shoulder. Or just yell, "Hey, Jim of Wikipedia!" in general. Jim.henderson (talk) 02:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to disappoint you but the picture is not of Iris Riverhawk whatever it says on the caption. It is a Geranium of some sort. Best wishes Plantsurfer (talk) 14:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly. I'd appreciate a genuine picture, but will check and revert if you haven't already. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot upload that public domain template.What I'm tryimg to di is put the images onto my user page but somehow vannot do it.Could you help me please? Thank you.jeanne (talk) 17:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You can revew what I did, and do similar things for any other pictures you may wish to treat similarly. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You do realize that reflex viewfinders don't suffer from parallax, correct? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 06:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; I used such instruments long ago. What I don't understand is how such matters belong here. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday June 1st, Columbia University area Last: 3/16/2008 This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, elect a board of directors, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).

We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

Also, check out our regional US Wikimedia chapters blog Wiki Northeast (and we're open to guest posts).
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I reverted your change to Candela, since the Manual of Style does not allow links in section headings. Instead, I added a link to the article on photometry at the bottom of the SI photometry units template, so it will appear in every article that uses that template.--Srleffler (talk) 22:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Better than I hoped for. Thanks. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Countess of Champagne. Thanks for your advise about my tendency to link too many dates, and I shall remember to add edit summaries. I wasn't worried about that profeesor's attacks against my lack of formal education. I had the chap sussed from the beginning; I knew his little game, alas it didn't work with me. About the Countess of Champagne. Marie sounds like she's the woman Mr. Weber was referring to or it could have been Blanche of Navarre, Countess of Champagne who was born in 1181. She has a large article on the web all you have to do is type in her name and she'll come up. I am inclined to believe that Marie is the heiress in question. It's a challenging question, a pity Weber wasn't more precise. Thanks for helping me with my photo by the way. Sorry I cannot give you a precise answer.jeanne (talk) 18:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

B ack again, I think Ive found your heiress. It was Alys de Vexin, Marie's half sister. Marie's date of birth was April 1145 and it's never been disputed. Alys is said in Wiki to have been born 4 October 1160 but Leo Van de Pas gives it as 23 April 1170 so this has to be our Countess. Van de Pas is pretty accurate with birthdates.Sometimes an astrologer's input can be helpful, no?jeanne (talk) 18:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the 1170 DOB is correct her mother would have been Adele of Champagne not Constance of Castile as the latter died in childbirth.I think the Wiki article on Alys needs to be verified and the name changed as Alys of the Vexin sounds a bit silly. What do you think?jeanne (talk) 18:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, are we to discuss it here? Fair enough, for matters that mainly involve my mild curiosity and your vigorous expertise, but first, edit summaries are important for a number of reasons including quick wp:patrol work. For my thousands of watchlisted articles, I react immediately and defensively to edits that are both anonymous and unsummarized, more calmly to those that are only one or the other, and usually only days later and much more tolerantly to those that offer both an account name and an explanation, any explanation at all. I assume many other patrollers take approximately similar approaches on the assumption that a documented edit is probably a good edit.

Professional scholars, even the arrogant ones, can teach us amateurs a few things, such as the benefits of caution and collaboration and the danger of jumping to conclusions based on vague, untraceable or unreliable sources. If we don't take those lessons to heart, we can at least get out of the way of people who do.

Eugen Weber was by reputation a consummate scholar, but as a mere fan of popularized history I don't read the meticulous material he produced for fellow scholars. Instead what I remembered vaguely was an episode of "The Western Tradition", his lighthearted gallop through the ages in the 1990s for television. As it happens, your answers did not lead directly to the suspected heiress, but they did provide search engine fodder which led me to a quote of his lecture, which gave the year 1284, which in turn led me to Joan I of Navarre. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for names of this and other noble Europeans long dead who spoke several dialects, some of them also dead now, it's a matter for people who study such questions more deeply than I do. I've seen "Juana la loca", daughter of the founding monarchs of the Spanish union, cited as "Jane the Insane," "Crazy Joan" and "Mad Johanna", all of which are reasonable translations. Far as I know this particular unfortunate 16th century princess didn't name herself in any foreign languages, but many royals did, were raised multilingual, didn't have a particular native language, and used whatever version served the purpose at hand, with the result that many versions are approximately equally authoritative. That's why I leave such questions to professionals and don't bother resenting the way they sometimes look down their noses at us amateurs. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jeanne I of Navarre (Joan I of Navarre) seems to have been born around 14 Jan. 1272(Old Style) which converts to 21 Jan 1273 (New Style); I disagree with you regarding the so-called expertise of scholars, many of whom I presume to say rely mainly on drilled knowledge and not fresh, original thinking that amateurs, such as myself employ with the purpose of ascertaining a precise DOB which is absolutely necessary if I'm to carry out adequate astological resaearch-a project that has occupied me for over 20 years. In the Middle Ages, the "universal language" was Latin; which enabled ambassadors and envoys to freely converse in various European Courts without being hampered by linguistic barriers. As I said before, I shall remember to add edit summaries in future as I can see it helps patrollers control what has been added to said article. I have seen your photos,, they are very good indeed. Good luck with your photography. Wikipedia is in dire need of more images! Any time I can be of help to you regarding people's identity or DOB feel free to drop me a line on my talk pages.jeanne (talk) 06:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness; fresh original thinking is precisely what an encyclopedia doesn't need. Its job is to report precisely what others have done, which is what professional scholars are trained to tease out. Yes, diplomacy and other state matters were done in Latin, which is why people were not named, for example, "Jeanne" in documents created for such purposes. However, much business was carried out in other languages, and often when a document says it's in "Latin" it's obviously early French or Castilian or Florentine or other dialect. Anyway, with medieval biography you're working in a difficult area, where the ability to read original documents, the application of precise citation in permanent footnotes, the balancing of multiple unreliable sources, and immediate cues in evanescent edit comments, are all more important than fresh, original thinking. I hope you find time to slow down and fill out such details correctly.

That's a nice thing about my new hobby of photography; it lets me produce something original and yet make a proper contribution to the encyclopedia. Of course, photographs also provide better information when properly supported by records of when, where and how they were made. More darn footnotes and, not knowing the standards by which professional photographers work, I put a lot of notes in image description pages in hopes they can help other photographers who want to understand my work and perhaps produce a better version. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jim, you misunderstood me. I only apply original research for my personal astrology project. When I write articles for Wikipedia or edit existing articles I ALWAYS provide verifiable references from published sources never original research. That was why that fight broke out between the professor and me. I did provide a DOB from an ecyclopedia. Anyway, you are correct in that medieval history and biography is difficult to research, made all the more difficult by the partisan nature of chroniclers from that time period. Even physical descriptions vary wildly. An accurate DOB can sometimes be found if one can find a document stating the date a particular person reached his or her majority.jeanne (talk) 07:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. I was hoping to have you comment here on the revert back-and-forth regarding the Newtown Creek picture in the Maspeth, Queens article. Thanks! --Anietor (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim. I think you did a great job with your article on the 7th. Interestingly, my great grandfather Edwin A. McAlpin attempted to enlist in the 7th when he was a young boy, but his father pulled him out. He later went on to command the 71st regiment of the NY Militia and became Adjutant General of the State of New York.

The reason for commenting is that I note there are two articles on the same topic: namely yours and 7th New York Militia. I'm a newbie here, but think you should consolidate that article into yours. I'd do it, but I don't know how, yet.

Anyway, thanks again for your contributions to Wiki! --Pmcyclist (talk) Pmcyclist (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I didn't write either 7th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment or 7th New York Militia but merely noticed the similarity and asked whether they were the same. Such questions are to be discussed in their talk pages, not in personal ones. Jim.henderson (talk) 03:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim,

I saw that you uploaded a picture of an R68 on Franklin Shuttle. Please rename it to R68, (and fix Franklin Page's link) as the Franklin Shuttle uses only R68s.

Thanks, Acps110 (talk) 11:53, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice picture. Even at postage stamp scales, it captures the whole neoclassical, City Beautiful, civic grandeur sweep of that particular pile of rocks. The older one was a bit too close; the building was cropped too much, and one lost a sense of scale. Yours captures the bigness of the place. And to think it would have been bigger, had the original master plan had been followed to completion. Take care. Gosgood (talk) 14:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Garry. Always nicest to get flattery from those who know better than me. As it happened, knowing little of architecture, less of art except that it's a pretty building, and not much more about photography, I was paying full attention to what I do know a bit of, namely astronomy and meteorology. The old photo was unsatisfactory to me because it was shot in midday with a clear sky, creating harsh shadows that hid the details of the facade. It's difficult to photograph the north side of a building, and midsummer morning and evening are the best chance. Yeah, it was also too tight in both shot and crop but I wasn't thinking much about that.

After photographing a grade crossing in Hunters Point I puffed up the hill to Crown Heights, saw to it that the Sun and clouds were sliding into place for the front of the museum, and pedalled around back to the parking lot for a few shots at the Statue of Liberty and a few others that were total failures but who cares. Back in front the Sun was casting soft shadows across the facade exactly as planned, so I took a few shots upsun, a few up close, and a bunch by positioning myself across Eastern Parkway from Botannical Garden with Sun shining intermittently on my right shoulder. Then pedalled down to Grand Army Plaza for a few less successful shot there, and finally to Pineapple Walk for dinner with some buddies.

The computer revealed that the clouds had let light through with exactly the right balance of hardness and softness for only one of the shots (except for two that were spoiled by a big white truck) and that's what you see. Probably I could get even better light at dawn this weekend (and no darn trucks) for a shot from near Washington Avenue if clouds are not too thick, but that would mean getting up and going to Brooklyn before dawn. Ain't gonna happen as long as my normal work shift gets off at midnight. Jim.henderson (talk) 02:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: your edit here, I started a discussion on the talk page. Thoughts? Answer there as I won't be watching here and would like to keep the discussion central. Thanks! _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 15:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know if there is now sufficient context to allow removal of the admonition to improve the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_Dynamics. Actually, I may be jumping to conclusions: I am not sure if the note at the top appeared as a result of your comment in the History for that page; if it didn't, can you please advise me how to improve the page further? I read the links and took their advice to add context, to bold-face the first reference to the page title in the text, etc. Thanks in advance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmaufer (talk • contribs) 16:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be a bit late getting back to you. With Summer weather I've been busy with my new hobby of Wikiphotography, running around town taking pictures of everything that doesn't move and some things that do and putting them into articles. Yes, your improvements obviate the context tag and are in accordance with Wiki rules far as I see. Congratulations; you've been studying and learning things that can be useful in other articles. Umm, except we should not be discussing a particular article in a personal talk page, This material properly belongs in the talk page of the article in question, so I'll copy my remarks into there and you should reply there if anywhere. Jim.henderson (talk) 02:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips for improvement. Always appreciated. Will get back to you today if I can find the talk page for the Mu Dynamics article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmaufer (talk • contribs) 15:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Every article has a "discussion" tab near the top of the page and the one in question leads to Talk:Mu Dynamics. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jim, I just wanted to say thank you for expanding the Hat tip article; the connection to the military salute helps to put things more in context. Thank you. Take care. ProfessorPaul (talk) 05:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice image at Hunterspoint Avenue station. I'm not sure I would've taken one like that, but then again, I've taken some pictures of stations from angles that nobody would expect. Bayside's image is pretty unorthodox. I took that from a ramp or staircase near the roof of the eastbound platform. ----DanTD (talk) 23:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dan. The little bicycle seen in some of my photos brings me to some places that are otherwise difficult. Seeing the miserable photo already present, I intended to go down to the platform for some shots but was delayed so had to settle for that view from the footbridge over the LIC connection to leave time to pedal to Brooklyn Museum before the Sun got too low.

A month ago one of the Germans pedalling behind me wondered what my salute or hand signal was supposed to mean. It meant I was raising the camera above the parapet alongside the bridge we were crossing, trying (unsuccessfully) to get a good shot of the Bay Ridge Branch below without stopping. For tomorrow if I get up early I shall go with another biker gang to Saddle River, New Jersey but they're a fast group and photo opportunties will be scarce. If I sleep late, then ferry to Rockaway, hoping for some nice shots of Brooklyn waterfront, then home alone through the middle of Brooklyn. Would be nice to get a shot of Ridgewood's Dummy Crossing but probably will be too rushed to go that far east before sunset. Good pix are not guaranteed; fun is. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Lighthouse International requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guidelines for people and for organizations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Stijndon (talk) 17:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, Bicycle Path didn't run through houses. Houses and other structures were built on land that used to be part of Bicycle Path. ----DanTD (talk) 15:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You are invited to attend the second annual New York picnic on August 24! This year, it will be taking place in the Long Meadow of Prospect Park in Brooklyn. If you plan on coming, please sign up and be sure to bring something! Please be sure to come!
You have received this automated delivery because your name was on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 20:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose when an image of the station house is available, the one of Covert Avenue could be relocated. Next time I'm up in New York, I want to get one of Garden City Station, along with some others I missed the chance to take care of on previous visits. On two occasions most recently I passed up chances to snap some shots of West Hempstead and Deer Park-Pine Aire Stations, and I've been kicking myself over it ever since. I even passed up what I thought would've been one last good shot of Medford Station. ----DanTD (talk) 18:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You had (quite justifiably) remarked on the rather pitiful state of the 66th Street (Manhattan), one of the articles recently targeted at a recent mass AfD. I wanted to thank you for all of your efforts on New York City and metro area articles, especially all of the images you have added, and invite you to take a look at my recent expansion. It's amazing what can be done in a very short time to expand these stubs into worthy articles. Alansohn (talk) 02:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim

I have put an article on the Wifi Interference talkpage about the video sender jammers, I don't know if you've seen it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shunt010 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a reminder that the WikiNYC Picnic is tomorrow (August 24) from 2 PM to 8 PM. If you plan on being lost, be sure to come ahead of time! To clarify, the picnic will be taking place within or adjacent to the Picnic House in Prospect Park, Brooklyn. I hope to see you there! --harej 03:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! From this edit summary, you appear to "speak" image. I have a shot I took of Colonnade Row. Well two, but one I couldn't use becayse the LPC sign is apparently copy-protected but I haven't a clue on how to access a commons image once I upload it there. Is there an easy tutorial somewhere? TravellingCari 01:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dissatisfied with the official instructions, I figured out my own methods this spring and summer and wrote them here this afternoon. You can ask for more on my Commons talk page, and I'll probably use such questions to improve my little pipeline piece. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I'll have a look through it this weekend and let you know if I have question. I'm sure I will, I'm image stupid! TravellingCari 03:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I thought of "Future" on the spot as a counter to the History section, but retitling it to "Return of passenger service" would seem to infer commuter rail use when you consider that the current and long use of the line has been for freight. The crux of the recent proposals have been to integrate the line within the NYC subway system, not the LIRR or Amtrak, so this isn't apropos either. --24.47.146.213 (talk) 09:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I didn't get it right, either, yet. We'll get there. Kindly continue discussions of this particular article in Talk:Bay Ridge Branch. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're ever biking through Central Park South, a good idea would be to take a picture of one of the entrances to Fifth Avenue (BMT Broadway Line). I was there last May, and I'm sorry I didn't snap some shots of it, along with a few others. ----DanTD (talk) 19:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]