User talk:Rdfox 76

Hello Rdfox 76! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Stardust8212 23:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply] Getting started Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting help Frequently asked questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Building consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Someone beat me with the welcome message. Darn. *grins*

Good contribs so far; something you might want to do is find references for some of the info you've included, like the mention of the Toyota statement, and add links to them. Just to make sure we meet WP:RS. Oh, and be sure you use edit summaries, too! Tony Fox (arf!) 21:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed something... are you making an assumption that Slash, the G'n'R guitarist, is the same as Harry Slash? 'Cuz I don't actually see any mention on the Slashtones' page of Slash being part of the recordings, and I don't see anything on Slash's page of the ECW stuff... check with me Wednesday or drop me a note on my talk page, okay? Tony Fox (arf!) 19:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cassandra is already in Category:Fictional Eurasians, which is a subcategory of Category:Fictional multiracial characters. --DrBat 19:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either you are confusing me with someone else or your impression of acceptable Wikipedia edits is somewhat mistaken. I changed the wording of the section slightly and moved the link to Cho's article to the first mention of him. I did notice that my edits had not been removed, or at least that someone else had returned them. --Arsene 17:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You expressed opinions on the reordering of Cho Seung-hui's name. Please vote in the straw poll on renaming him in Wikipedia here. --Dynaflow 06:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re your edit to Shego, :Stop Team Go" has aired. That episode went out on Disney channel Europe at about midday Eastern Time.

perfectblue 19:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from User:Rdfox 76 Tony Fox (arf!) 19:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

You are cordially invited to List of Kim Possible episodes, where it has been requested that you "finish" the tables for seasons 2-4 so that they no longer have placeholders for the pictures that you removed.

Creating formatting problems and leaving them for other users to fix is a disruption of Wikipedia and a breach of etiquette.

perfectblue 12:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you have an RV listed and I didn't check to see which way it was going.

perfectblue 15:44, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rd, you should call out the talk page weirdos on vandalism. Also, would you like to be one of the experts on the Shego page? Alexlayer is already there, I'm thinking of adding myself.

=CJK= 22:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rdfox 76: Just wanted to throw you BIG props on your tough defense of Stop Team Go. Wrote almost every word of it (standing on the shoulders of giants, of course). That article is in a tough place: people have some strong opinions about it. So thanks again. Sbgdcom 08:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rdfox,
For recent edits on Animaniacs, you said that certain new edits were "mentioned in the referenced interviews." Please cite the proper source on the article; Otherwise I'll have to delete it because it'll be original research. Thank You.
Gak Blimby

Ever have one of those days where the weirdness just doesn't seem to want to go away? (The last one is thoroughly amusing. If it's been deleted already, look at the page history. Unfortunately, it looks like the "evidence" page has been deleted... too bad, the parrot was classic.)

My calendar's not marked. Is it a full moon today or something? Tony Fox (arf!) 16:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rdfox 76,
I believe that the Animaniacs article is now ready to undergo the process for Wikipedia's Good Article Nomination. If you have any concerns about the article's quality, please write it in the Animaniacs Talk Page at your earliest convienience. Thanks very much, ---- Gak Blimby 09 June 2007 (UTC)

GOOD NEWS! ANIMANIACS JUST GOT LISTED! WOO! Gak Blimby 03:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Holy hell. =/ Tony Fox (arf!) review? 06:29, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Big favor to ask: I've gotten into a dispute due to an edit that I reverted on 2 July over at the Supergirl entry; my change is disputed and argued over at the Talk:Supergirl#Kara Zor-El page. Since you're an editor whose work I respect, I'd appreciate it very much if you could serve as an objective observer and express an opinion about the dispute at the Talk page. As I've said there, I'm willing to abide by whatever resolution an objective, experienced observer might suggest. (I thought I'd try to resolve things through this route before requesting arbitration or anything like that.)--Galliaz 00:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert. =) Tony Fox (arf!) review? 15:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to reconsider how, exactly, you want to phrase this talk page response. The user to whom you're responding is obviously not wiki-savvy (he doesn't even know how to tilde-sign his IP address yet) and, if he is who he says he is, has probably borne witness to a rather profound, senseless tragedy. If someone comes up with a bad idea while trying to be helpful, it is not necessary to insult him ("...is this what passes for a tech school sophomore's literacy level these days?"). Just tell him no and why.

Though I won't refactor your comment, I would ask that you read Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers and seriously weigh whether or not you want that kid to read what you wrote when he checks back to see if anyone responded to his concerns. --Dynaflow babble 17:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added some links that confirm the copycat reports. ABC News links are included. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=3413386&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312 http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=3413386 http://wap.go.com/wireless/abcnews/d/46a89c6d/section/US/3412664_2 UnclePaco 21:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am a professor at Boston College studying the development of the Wikipedia page on the Virginia Tech massacre. You were one of the top 5% of editors to the page, and I was wondering if you would be willing to answer a brief survey about your participation.

• The survey can be found at: User:Geraldckane/survey (your response will be by email).
• Information about my research can be found at: User:Geraldckane

Your participation will help me (and hopefully the Wikipedia community) better understand the collaborative process that results in exemplary articles. If you do not wish to participate and this solicitation was unwelcome, please accept my apologies and simply delete this message from your talk page. I will not contact you again.

--geraldckane 17:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've reverted your reversion. I'm addressing this here so we can discuss it rather than go through a pointless edit war. Poison Ivy's status as a bisexual has never been confirmed, only insinuated. I just want to be accurate. We can't label the character as LGBT based on assumption. Can you verify her bisexuality with a reliable source? A gx7 12:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree that it has been indicated many times that Ivy is a possible bisexual,

the evidence you have provided is still not conclusive. We can't allocate categories that depend on a certain interpretation or assumption; this is a place of facts. Let's be honest, not much thought goes into it. Lesbian tendancies are freqently used for titillation. They don't prove a character's orientation. Until DC have definitively categorised Ivy as bisexual then I don't think we should either. A gx7 06:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think your edits were reasonable, as long as you're sure it was sexual gratification she displayed from the snuff film and not generic villainous sadism. And you're right, if there was a "comic book characters in the closet" category it would fit about 50 characters (with about 48 coincidences of them being attractive females). A gx7 08:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A proposal has been made to merge Replacement I-35W Mississippi River bridge into I-35W Mississippi River bridge. The matter is being discussed at Talk:Replacement I-35W Mississippi River bridge. Please feel free to comment. Thank you. Kablammo 18:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I recently noticed your edit to the Kim Possible article. I have replaced your edit with mine concerning the airdate. Despite that the final episode has yet to air, we know when it will air thus completing the season and show (unless there is a fifth season in the works). I feel it is necessary to add in the final airdate since it would have been added in eventually. Thank you for your time. TrackFan 18:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your disagreement. For you see, it can be easily edited to the accordance of when the final episode will air. This has been the same with the American Dragon: Jake Long article. Once production was over for the show and the final airdate known, it was added into the infobox. Disney, however, moved the the final airdate to a later time and the new final airdate was added into the infobox. If Disney does the same for Kim Possible, it can be easily corrected in the article. TrackFan 00:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I want you to know, I reverted the removal of the mention of the Power Girl fanfilms from the main Power Girl page because there was a pretty healthy debate over it when articles about the first two came up for deletion.

I participated in those discussions, and it wasn't a "healthy debate", it was a complete blowout. These fanfilms are of no importance except to their maker's ego. I'm just following up what should have been done in the first place. --Calton | Talk 23:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's great that you are here to uphold Wikipedia's strict standards, that is why the site is so great today I am sure.

But you have misunderstood the situation.

Gsmr's comment added nothing to the discussion and was pure spam. We do not need to flood discussion with personal opinions.

The fact that I said "noone gives a sh&t what you think" was in a private message to him, and if he found offense to that, well too bad, he needs to grow up.

It is ridiculous that everyone is so politically correct and worried about stepping on everyone else's toes; there was no profanity of any sorts..... especially since it was in private, I see nothing wrong.

I am one of the users of wikipedia that are careful to make sure it is of the highest quality: editing poor quality out, and supplying my own input from time to time (referenced, and carefully written). Gsmr has a history of vandalism and pointless spam, so I was writing him a message in hopes he would get the point and stop defacing this site in the future. So if he came complaining to you, well, that's just too bad that you've let him pull the wool over your eyes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jovack (talk • contribs)

To Jovack: Actually, the no personal attacks warning was quite appropriate for the situation. User talk pages are not private correspondence, and every Wikipedia user should remember to be civil to one another, even when dealing with people who may not be editing properly. If you want to leave a message with regards to a possible vandal, please take a look at the templates that are available, and use those to warn people regarding such matters - using bad language is not really acceptable in such messages. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I'm pretty much brand new to wikipedia so I'll take heed. Jovack 02:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I take your point that this belongs in Wiktionary, but I am trying to clean up the whole set of interlinkings and keep getting edit conflicts with you. Can you please leave the topic alone for half an hour so I can finish? Thanks! Rodparkes 02:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick response. I have explained the reason for my edits on the Guitar Hero (series) talk page. Rodparkes 03:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I see you are interested in anime. Have you watched Oh My Goddess!? -- Cat ^chi? 23:15, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Rdfox,
Thank you very much for your contributions to the Animaniacs article. I have just nominated the article for featured article candidacy, so if you want to express any concern about the article's quality, please do so here. Thanks again, Gak Blimby 19:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't improve articles on demand. You mentioned Editors... I have been working on this series alone for quite some time. You seem to be in the know of the series. Would you mind help expand it? -- Cat ^chi? 14:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd love to help out, except that right now, I'm working on a series of major upgrades to some of the Kim Possible articles, a series where I have a much better grasp on where to look for sources. By "Editors," I meant to suggest all those interested in the OMG articles; maybe you could ask on the anime-and-manga WikiProject's talkpage if they have anyone who might be free to help? Rdfox 76 15:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I sadly tried and the end result was me watching the sunset alone :/

I did ask OMG fans off wiki for help. I have been waiting for their involvement since.

-- Cat ^chi? 15:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

A goddess descends to your talk page

Hi, I noticed your username appears on this category and would like to invite you to take part in a general improvement drive on all articles relevant to Oh My Goddess! including character articles, episode articles and others. -- Cat ^chi? 21:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I see that you've edited out some lines on the main Kim Possible article. While I certainly understand your reasons for doing them, erasing this one sentence puzzles me:

"He is considered Kims main arch rival."

Aside from the lack of an apostrophe, what's wrong with it? Drakken is the main villain in the majority of episodes. I hope I don't seem so nitpicky about this, but I was just curious. ----DanTD 05:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, he was an awesome wrestler...too bad he had his issue there at the end. It was very shocking to me because he just didn't seem like that type. I still wonder what those bibles mean. For Roid Rage, you are raged out, it's like he placed those there for a purpose. Perhaps to save each soul from the horrible death it was going to have, I don't know. Weird.The Cleveland Browns are awesome! 18:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do apologise. I have no idea why it happened, I certainly didn't do it deliberately. Looking at the timings of the edits it looks like it could have been a combination of of edit conflicts and something going awry. If you look at the last edit I made and the one immediately before it, it's a duplicate the only difference being the time stamp and the missing comment. It looks like the server has received 2 copies of my message with Wanderer57's comment sandwiched between them which in effect deleted his. Weird. ---- WebHamster 02:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:PCP has agreed that all species articles need to be merged into large lists. THere was a GAR before on four of the species GA articles, and those were all delisted. I take TTN's boldness in delisting and merging Golduck as a use of WP:IAR, as the main project behind the improvement of these articles has no problem with it and the result would have been the same if it was listed on GAR or not. hbdragon88 (talk) 02:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 21:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was originally going to post this on that talk page but decided it would be even more off-topic to continue it there. Anyway, thank you. Yeah, my question was kinda forum-y, but 1) I'm not registered on any forums and 2) I thought if it was true it should be noted (as I said). I can see where my (allegedly) humorusly-worded post might have been better suited to an encyclopedia had it not been so (allegedly) humorusly-worded.Fitfatfighter (talk) 09:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated Wade Load, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wade Load and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like me to add your talk page?--68.55.160.252 (talk) 04:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Severe weather NewsletterVol. I, No. 1, Issue 1, February 2008 If you would like to delete this message, the original is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Severe weather/Newsletter/February 2008

Welcome [edit] Welcome to the first monthly issue of the WikiProject Severe weather newsletter! In this issue, we will welcome you to the newsletter, and give you an idea of what the project is about, what it has done, and what it plans to do. So, enjoy reading the February 2008 issue! If you have not signed up to receive the newsletter, you may do so at the newsletter page. If you do not sign up, you will not receive the next newsletter! New project articles [edit] Marion, Illinois Tornado Outbreak- Featured as a "Did you know" article on the Main Page List of May 2003 Tornado Outbreak Sequence tornadoes (split from the main article) 2008 Vancouver tornado- Details the recent abnormal tornado in Vancouver, Washington Barneveld, Wisconsin tornado outbreak- Details a destructive tornado outbreak that hit areas of Wisconsin in 1984. January 2008 Tornado Outbreak Sequence-Details the recent tornado outbreak (see section below) Featured story [edit] This featured story focuses on the relative WikiWork for this project. The relative WikiWork is the measure of how lose a project is to having every article featured. It is a complex calculation; ω = a + 2g + 3b + 4s + 5t where a is A-class articles, g is GA-class articles, b is B-class articles, s is start-class articles, and t is stub-class articles. Thus, the closer you are to 0 (zero), the closer you are to having every article featured. The WikiWork number for every class is added, then divided by the number of articles, similar to averaging, and it is found that the relative WikiWork for this project is Ω = 4.182. Ω is a symbol for the relative WikiWork factor. That is not the best number, as we are closer to 5 than we are to 0, and we are very close to 5. This means that the majority of the articles in the project are either stub, or start. That is what we need to change. So, while more severe weather articles are good, we should try not to publish as many stub class, and fewer start class articles. Wikiwork statistics [edit] Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Severe weather articles by quality statistics Members section [edit] New members User:Juliancolton (Talk) The most recent user to join the project, but is very active. User:Juliancolton is also an editor of this newsletter. Featured member User:CrazyC83 is this month's featured member for WikiProject Severe weather. (The following text is from User:JForget's nomination.) User:CrazyC83 - One of the most active (if not the most) members in recent tornado activity coverage and monitoring. Recent examples of this includes the February-March 2007 Tornado Outbreak in Alabama and Missouri, the May 2007 Tornado Outbreak in Kansas and Oklahoma and the January 2008 Tornado Outbreak Sequence in Missouri, Wisconsin, Arkansas, Mississippi and Alabama. Had also made coverage in non-article tornado events such as the New Orleans tornado event on February 13, 2007 and the tornado event associated with the Superstorm of December 16, 2007. User:CrazyC83 made numerous edits, more than one hundred, to 2008 Super Tuesday tornado outbreak. Significant storms [edit] Main article: January 2008 Tornado Outbreak Sequence Significant storms last month included the outbreak in the United States in early to mid-January that produced 71 tornadoes and killed three people. Several tornado emergencies were issued in association with supercells during this outbreak. This outbreak was very similar to a classic spring severe weather outbreak, but extending farther north than even most late season outbreaks. The hardest hit areas on January 7 were the Springfield, Missouri metropolitan area and areas immediately to the north of Chicago, three people were killed near Springfield throughout the Southwestern Missouri Ozarks. On January 8, my area, the Tri-State region of Evansville, Indiana, was hit with the tornado outbreak. Only a few funnel clouds were reported in my area. Most tornadoes of the day were confined to the Memphis, Tennessee area and Eastern Arkansas, where one person was killed. On January 9 only a few wind and hail reports were received[1]. On January 10, however, the action started back up. More tornadic storms developed across the Southern United States, including several significant storms that produced tornadoes. These tornadoes severely damaged rual towns in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. The most notable of these tornadoes was reported in Lamar County, Alabama where 1 person was injured as several buildings were destroyed in this EF-3 tornado. Five more deaths (three by tornadoes and two by straight-line winds) were reported on January 29 from a series of scattered tornadoes and a serial derecho across the Ohio Valley stretching south into Arkansas.[2] References [edit] ^ http://spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/080109_rpts.html SPC reports for January 9 ^ Storm Prediction Center 20080129's Storm Reports For more references see January 2008 Tornado Outbreak Sequence

Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 14:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you signed up to receive the newsletter, but did not sign up to become a WikiProject Severe weather member. You should do so at the link. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 14:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Severe weather Newsletter Issue 2, March 2008 If you would like to delete this message, the original is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Severe weather/Newsletter/March 2008

Welcome [edit] Welcome to the second edition of the WikiProject Severe weather newsletter. In this edition of the newsletter we will detail the upcoming severe weather season, touch on last month's tornado outbreaks, and look at a new proposal for formatting tornado outbreak articles. New project articles [edit] Arkansas-Mississippi-Alabama tornado outbreak-A late-season outbreak in 2001 List of May 2004 tornado outbreak sequence tornadoes-Split from the main article Benton, Arkansas Tornado Outbreak-Recreated a needed deleted page 2008 Super Tuesday tornado outbreak (accompanied by a separate list)- Details the massive outbreak of last month, see below A myriad of new articles were added late in the month by User:JForget about older, lesser known tornado outbreaks. May 1968 tornado outbreak Dallas tornado outbreak of April 1957 Wheelersburg, Ohio tornado outbreak Arkansas-Tennessee tornado outbreak of 1952 Mississippi Valley tornado outbreak of February 1971 Saragosa, Texas tornado 2003 South Dakota tornado outbreak-Added by User:Stormtracker94 Featured story [edit] This month's featured story has two parts, the first part detailing the upcoming severe weather season, and the second part will detail a new proposal for tornado outbreak articles. With numerous outbreaks already, this season may very well be one of the worst ever. First, a review of past seasons. Last year's severe weather was mainly focused on the western High Plains, with no classic Oklahoma tornado outbreaks. Most of the outbreaks last season had supercells forming along either a cold front or dry line in western Kansas and the panhandles of Oklahoma and Texas. Most of these storms moved due north or northeast, producing flooding problems. The severe weather season was especially boring farther east in the Midwest where only an occasional squall line moved through. I personally missed the Greensburg tornado because I went to Saint Louis on May 5 to watch a baseball game. I can still remember seeing the high risk in Kansas on the monitor in the rest stop. 2006 was a little bit more active and widespread. As always, the NWS and SPC did an amazing job of forecasting the storms. Back to the future (ha!) the CPC outlooks are saying warmer and drier than normal in tornado alley. However, it looks to be a bit more exciting severe weather season for people farther east in the Midwest (including me) with warmer than normal temperatures and equal chances of being above and below forecast values, which usually means normal amounts. As local TV stations have pointed out, we should all be prepared. I know we have all heard it, but it still needs to be repeated. Two words: Weather Radio Everyone should have a tone-alerted weather radio, SAME if you perfer to not be woken up for a flash flood watch 50 miles from you. Weather radios will also go off if your local emergency management agency requests a statement be issued by the National Weather Service for things such as evacuations. (Note: Even though there was a gas leak in my town with evacuations, a prodcut was not issued by the National Weather Service, even when they are issued to request people to stay off roads.) If you are under a tornado warning or a high end severe thunderstorm warning (i.e.: 70 m.p.h. winds +) go to an interior room on the lowest floor of your building, preferably a basement. Stay away from windows and any other hazardous objects. I may not have included it all, so obey the safety rules in warnings from the National Weather Service. Spotters should call the NWS immediately upon observing severe weather. If the event was borderline severe, use E-Spotter (If your office uses it). Remember the #1 thing: Stay Safe this season anywhere you are, from chasing in Oklahoma to watching it unfold on TV in Ohio. New Standards [edit] With the upcoming severe weather season, User:Southern Illinois SKYWARN has proposed new standards for tornado outbreak articles. Overview States the number of tornadoes, fatalities. Briefly describes any strange events and records set. (Required) Meteorological synopsis Describes weather leading up to the outbreak and SPC products issued.(Required) Confirmed tornadoes Tornado table, no text besides that in the table (Required, should be split into list if very large) Significant storms (Variable name) Describes the most significant storms and tornadoes (Required) Aftermath Describes aftermath in detail, should also include disaster declerations (Required) Non-thunderstorm effects/Non-tornadic effects Use the first if snow or other non-thunderstorm events occurred (Optional) The latter should be standard on all pages describing effects from a squall line, hail, flash flooding, or other non-tornadic effects (Required) Oddities/Records Only used if necessary (Optional) References (Required) See also Should always link to at least List of North American tornadoes and tornado outbreaks (Required) External links External links should only go to news stories or NWS pages (Required) These standards have been developed for tornado outbreaks where a lot of information is available. Older outbreaks should include as much information as possible. Readers are encouraged to express their opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Severe weather/Tornado. Wikiwork statistics [edit] Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Severe weather articles by quality statistics Members section [edit] New members [edit] User:Stormtracker94 (talk) has joined the project after a suggestion from a current member User:Rdfox 76 (talk) also joined after a suggestion Featured member [edit] This month's featured member is User:JForget The following text is from User:Southern Illinois SKYWARN's nomination This user has started numerous articles on older, significant tornado outbreaks that met notability requirements. JForget recently received a barnstar (even if it was from me) for his work in WikiProject Severe Weather. JForget is one of the most tireless contributors to the project and deserves to be this month's featured member. Note: Readers of this newsletter are urged to check the newsletter page for nominations for featured member and featured story. Significant storms [edit] Main article: 2008 Super Tuesday tornado outbreak Obviously the first order of business for this section is the massive, devastating tornado outbreak on February 5, or Super Tuesday. 82 tornadoes and 59 fatalities were confirmed in association with this outbreak. This was the deadliest outbreak since the United States-Canadian Outbreak in 1985 which killed 88. Tornado watches, many of them Particularly dangerous situation watches at one point extended from the Ohio Valley to the Gulf Coast. Instability and shear values were extreme, especially for February. This was a very well forecasted and warned event, despite media reports of people receiving no warning. I am sorry, but I am going to rant a little about this. The National Weather Service field offices and the Storm Prediction Center did an amazing job of warning of this event despite the speed of the storms. Many National Weather Service offices held at least one conference call with emergency managers, media, spotter groups, and other interested parties. I am outraged that the media reported this as if the forecasters were asleep at the wheel, while this really was one of the best forecasted events ever. Now while we will have to wait for the likely service assessment to come out, I believe that all numbers from the false-alarm rate to the probability of detection were above national averages. Now that I am done with my little editorial, I will get back to the outbreak. A high risk was issued by the Storm Prediction Center on the morning of February 5 for most of Arkansas, the first such issuance in February since 1998. Later in the morning, it was further was extended to include western Kentucky, northwestern Mississippi, the Missouri Bootheel, West Tennessee, and Far Southern Illinois (Close to where I live, Yikes!). A moderate risk surrounded this area, where the squall line was the main problem. A massive squall line developed in the Great Plains prompting only a few warnings at first, but when it came into the area where the cap had broken and unfortunately supercells went through, it exploded producing strong winds, hail, and a few tornadoes. Now for the supercells. Supercells began to develop late in the day in Arkansas and Missouri after the cap broke much later than expected. These supercells began to move north and east and then became tornadic. A record five tornado emergencies were issued in association with this outbreak. One supercell developed to the southwest of Memphis and devastated eastern and southern suburbs. Other notable supercells had tracks of over 200 miles and produced several tornadoes. For more information about its non-tornadic effects see the article and the upcoming WikiProject Non-Tropical storms newsletter. Other outbreaks struck in the middle of the month throughout the south, especially along the Gulf Coast. Only one death has been confirmed in association with any of these outbreaks, however extensive property damage occurred.

Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 16:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mention it. Word-choice is the eternal "banana peal" in front of all us editors. Glad to have helped. Cheers, Redux (talk) 23:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently working on Guitar Hero (series) and noticed that you have made substantial contributions recently to the article. If you have time, I would appreciate it if you could help out and improve the article to Featured Article status. Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 17:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, academic integrity in editing the posts..

Seems Mr RdFox76 is currently working on the Guitar Hero article and I've crossed the line. While being well versed in the English language, my intentions were good, just without citation. I am the creator of the Jamstykk peripheral, what other citation would I need?

I will make sure as to place my controller details in the proper place next time. It was a first post...watch the toes!Williamross7 (talk) 06:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The tornado article IS A CURRENT EVENT. Seven states have been hit - so far. 65.173.105.197 (talk) 02:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rv'g colleagues edits bcz you don't grasp the (apparently harmless) markup they are using is vandalism. Stop it.
"WTF", especially in an edit summary, is incivility. Stop it.
I'm normally glad to explain technical tricks to colleagues, and in this case i'll follow thru with the behavior even in the absence of the emotion:

The familiar Wiki markups for links and for section headings each create multiple HTML entities at once:

Link: we might as well call them a link and an anchor. The anchor is what you see on the page that contains that markup; the link is what gets you to the other page or section.

Section: call them heading, target, and ToC entry. The heading is the big type, and some white space; the target is what the browser looks for when someone links to the page with a URL containing a # sign; the ToC entry is some text and a lk to the target.

The markup i used creates the target without any of the rest of the secn apparatus. The purpose is to make a point on the page (OK, really the line in which the point falls) URL-addressable without burdening users with an extra heading and ToC entry. I learned to do it when i noticed that clicking on A7 in an edit summary doesn't land you at a heading. (I don't know where that's documented, tho i've since noticed somewhere a short list of HTML tags that are not thrown away when wiki-markup is scanned, and the statement that most of what you'd want to get by using the others can be done by putting the tag inside a <span/> tag. No, wait a minute, somewhere in MoSDab, i think it's prescribed, tho that's not where i learned it.) If that doesn't help you, ask me a more specific question in a few days, when i'll surely have calmed down.

--Jerzy•t 05:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not gonna say i've never seen this, which i ran across in an edit summary(!) but i'm pretty sure i never used it. It sounds like it's probably a more user-friendly mechanism for the same thing, but i haven't studied it. (Also sounds like i may be misusing the word "anchor" in the above.) Gotta run.
  --Jerzy•t 07:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  

Why did you undo my edit to Tornado? I would like to know the reason. -- IRP ☎ 15:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rdfox 76. You have new messages at User_talk:IRP#Undo_of_edit_on_Tornado.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{newmessages}} template.

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF (talk) 00:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is what is happening here what I think is happening here? 198.163.53.11 (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP spam from a City of Winnipeg network. Make what you will of that. . dave souza, talk 22:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active participant in WikiProject Meteorology, WikiProject Severe weather, and/or WikiProject Non-tropical storms. I have made a proposal to start an official assessment page for these three projects, under the WP:METEO banner. Since this would need significant participation to work properly, I'd like input from as many interested parties as possible (even those who may not watch the project pages), so please visit the discussion here and leave your thoughts/opinions. Thanks! -RunningOnBrains 02:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suppose I know you from somewhere in real life? Fine if you want to email me privately if so. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To link directly to images instead of embedding them, put a colon after the two brackets, like so: [[:File:example.jpg]] This works when linking to categories as well. -RunningOnBrains^{(talk page)} 05:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Severe weather The severe weather article is currently undergoing a Request for Comment as to its structure and organization. The RfC can be found here.

Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. 19:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok then how am I supposed to believe this with no source? Please explain: launched in 2010, Sorkin reprising her role? This is not a place to just store fan speculation. —Mike Allen 23:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I got that. But does it say that Harley will be again voiced by Sorkin and that it will be released this year? —Mike Allen 00:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even think it's necessary or allowed to write back what you saw in a teaser trailer, especially since a teaser trailer is not very reliable. I would escalate this at the Project Video Games.. but I have a headache. Maybe later. —Mike Allen 02:34, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rdfox,

I appreciate your efforts to fight vandalism on the List of Animaniacs episodes, however your automatic reversion was not appropriate in this case, as it reverted much more than just the vandalism. It took me a long time to remove the inappropriate links on that list, and it took me a long time today to remove them yet again. Please revert vandalism manually in the future when the previous edit does not constitute vandalism.

Thank you,

Neelix (talk) 14:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This all I've found on Golden Age Deadpool,

http://www.deadpoolbugle.com/2010/04/first-look-at-golden-age-deadpool-from.html

I have no idea where the other information came from, but he was right about there being a Golden Age Deadpool--Ottertron (talk) 04:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oy. We may now officially be reaching Deadpool Overload. But in any event, until there's a decision regarding what to do with not-yet-out books, let's keep it out until the book hits store shelves. rdfox 76 (talk) 00:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, way too much Deadpool. But that's fine on waiting.--Ottertron (talk) 02:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found sources, see the talkpage for Kim Possible Characters, N.I.M. (talk) go behind the line. 04:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why take delete the images that put the characters in Animaniacs?--HeinzDoofenshmirtz (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid an edit war, please see the ongoing discussion of the origin of the program on the show's talk page. Drmargi (talk) 17:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Re. user Nailedtooth war editing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_nuclear_accidents to hide nuclear incident in France. The entry clearly fits the scope of the article as the incident involved a uranium leak and is therefore fissile material. If you still agree could you assist against Nailedtooth who has a history of censoring edits on this page. Thanks. AzureAnt (talk) 20:51, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Smithville tornado has been rated Ef5. [1] -CWY2190(talk • contributions) 13:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How is me adding the statuses of the characters completely unnecessary? Was it because I put a little to much in them as well as what I added to the paragraphs? STCooper1(STCooper1 (talk) 15:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC))[reply]

That's an excellent detail you added about the film, citing Favreau on the DVD commentary. But could we please have a timestamp of where this information purportedly appears within the roughly two-hour commentary? Otherwise it's like citing a book without giving a page number.

Also, while not required, it would also be extremely helpful to quote his exact words, since unlike with Web sources, other editors cannot instantly check a DVD track to see if what he says matches the information. You'd be surprised, and I'm sure it's not the case here with you, but I have seen countless times that other editors will take a quote in black-and-white text and say in a Wiki article that the quote says something it doesn't.

Anyway, it is a great piece of information you found, and I hope we can get in fully cited and footnoted. With thanks,--Tenebrae (talk) 14:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Afraid I just have the first Iron Man on DVD. (Dude! Hope you find your IM2!) Can't speak for other editors, but that sounds pretty close to a time stamp. Maybe say in the footnote or work it into the prose, "Favreau on the DVD commentary track, when the post-credits scene begins." Thanks again for your good work! --Tenebrae (talk) 22:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to take a look at that edit again - before my removal, there were two exact copies of the information in the section, one right after the other. I simply removed one of the copies. I've reverted it back. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gah, sorry about that! Completely missed it... rdfox 76 (talk) 03:05, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just for clarity, no I did not re-start the edits for which I was blocked. And I patiently waited out a month when I was not blocked but had to act as if I were (and because of this no admin would consider an "unblock"). Rich Farmbrough, 15:25, 1 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

I've put a request on WP:RPP - X201 (talk) 07:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is an ongoing discussion at List of Category 6 Atlantic hurricanes as to whether this page should be kept or redirected to List of Category 5 Atlantic hurricanes. Your input on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. United States Man (talk) 05:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How can correct grammar and more accurate links not be an improvement?CrazyLuca (talk) 23:59, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am just here to say that bias you have against me is plainly obvious, and I am asking you kindly to back off, as I am starting to get annoyed. I am starting to think that you see my username and instinctively hit revert. You pretty much admitted this in your reversion of the 1965 Palm Sunday article. If you would simply do some basic fact checking, this could all be avoided

My change to "Lacon, IL" was sourced via Grazulis, and you obviously reverted because you saw my username, and didn't even check or research the validity of my edit. I would bet money that if any other user made that edit, you wouldn't have reverted it. If you have this idea that I make willy-nilly edits with no basis, then you are mistaken. I dig through hours online resources, old newspaper archives, books, and pdf documents to find my information. I take pride in providing valuable, detailed, and verifiable info on historical tornadic events. Seeing the reversion of all this work is frustrating to say the least. All I ask is for you to trust me a little more, and actually READ the sources and information provided. Sharkguy05 (talk) 04:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)Sharkguy05[reply]

I have reverted him on account of the first reference. I don't think Grazulis should be used when there are more sources. And, of course, he keeps failing WP policies (WP:NPA and WP:ASG). He is the one who needs a warning. United States Man (talk) 04:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion ongoing regarding altering the naming conventions for tornado outbreak and tornado outbreak sequence articles. Please feel free to view and comment on the discussion here. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E) via User:Ks0awb} 22:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC) You are receiving this notice because you are listed as a member of WikiProject Severe Weather. If you would not like to receive future WikiProject Severe Weather notifications, please add your signature at User:Ks0stm/Notify list.[reply]

Due to your membership in [[WikiProject Severe weather, I thought that the discussion going on there regarding proposed changes to the tornado table might interest you. If you are interested in participating in discussion, please feel free to join in at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Severe weather#Reference column in the tornado table. All views are welcome, and please do not feel obligated to participate if you are not interested. Inks.LWC (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This should lend some credibility to my edit, as this is straight from the series creator/producer herself, Lauren Faust. http://comments.deviantart.com/4/1603670/1787126283 CrystalBrony (talk) 08:42, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not "copying" the article, Thunderbolt siren. I am merely fixing it and giving it a NEW PAGE. This is not stealing anything and there is no need to delete it. Merging it is fine, but why delete it? There is good info on my page, so I don't see the need to delete it. JoJoes123 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello member of Category:Wikipedians who use IRC! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "#wikipedia-en-help ^connect" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".

To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from Category:Wikipedians who use IRC.
Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page.
This message has been sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c)[reply]

Hot Spot was directed by Friz Freleng, not Chuck Jones. Also, can you add "directed by (insert director's name here) in (insert year here)" on the Wikipedia video links as well as replacing "Hot Spot, directed by Chuck Jones in 1945" with "Hot Spot, directed by Friz Freleng in 1945" on the Wikipedia video link, please? 24.180.56.157 (talk) 22:31, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The destroyer escorts built for Britain (the Captain class) were painted originally in US Navy Measure 16 (arctic) camouflage, also known as the Thayer System after its author. The pattern was indeed white with polygons of a pale blue of Thayer's invention, hence its (official USN) name of Thayer Blue. It was defined according to the 1929 Munsell color system as 5B 8/2. Solicitr (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That was an uncommon mistake on my part. Sorry... Dustin (talk) 00:25, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rdfox 76. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rdfox 76. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you may be interested. I made a statement to ArbCom regarding the WiR Twitter posts. You mentioned something about hauling the whole project as a party...? starship.paint (talk) 07:02, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Starship.paint In fairness, I was being somewhat sarcastic with the suggestion, though I wouldn't disagree with having whoever was responsible for that series of posts attacking Fram being included. I'll look over your statement and get back to you. (Sorry if this is a bit brief, but I'm running back and forth to the vet with my parents' dog that I'm petsitting right now, so I'm not certain when I'll be able to respond in any more detail.) rdfox 76 (talk) 14:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I forgot to update you, I already added "Whoever operated the @WikiWomenInRed Twitter account to post about WP:FRAM," as an involved party. starship.paint (talk) 14:32, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

so, i noticed that you maed an edit to external links on Kim Possible, and i gotta tell you, you were wrong.

the current link for the official site is dead: http://disneychannel.disney.com/kim-possible

this site leads to kim possible site, check it out for yourself: https://movies.disney.com/kim-possible

the "movie" site you were talking about is here: https://movies.disney.com/kim-possible-2019

i dare you go go to all three sites and see my point.--Jetcold0 (talk) 23:31, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear project member, This message is being sent out to encourage new ideas and feedback on those proposed in regard to the colors debate for WikiProject Weather. For those who are unaware of what's been happening over the last year, I will give a brief summary. We have been discussing proposed changes to the colors of the dots on tropical cyclone maps and templates and infoboxes across the entire weather project in order to solve issues related to the limited contrast between colors for both normal vision as well as the various types of color blindness (MOS:ACCESS). We had partially implemented a proposal earlier this year, however, it was objected to by a number of people and additional issues were presented that made it evident this wasn't the optimal solution. We tried to come up with other solutions to address the issues related to color contrast, however, none of them gained traction and no consensus was generated.

We need your help and I encourage you to propose your own scale and give feedback on those already listed. Keep in mind that we are NOT making a decision on any individual proposal at this time. We are simply allowing people to make proposals and cultivate them given feedback from other project members. Please visit our project page for additional details. The proposal phase will close no later than December 31st at 23:59 UTC. Noah^Talk 04:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you and anyone else who wants to to edit Draft:list of particularly dangerous situation watches. It seems as if that article has sorta been forgotten about. We’ve only gotten down to 2020 (for completely listed and in some cases not even that far) and if I recall, the entries only go back to 2018. There’s still a lot more in IEM archives. Your help at expanding the list to mainspace ready format would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. (Ps I have sent this message or a variant thereof to a bunch of other people trying to get folk’s attention) West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 19:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rdfox 76, If you are going to reply, please do so on the article talk page. There is a similar discussion going on there. Do not reply here. Thank you. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 21:55, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]