User talk:Cullen328

I think I understand, but I guess I will have to study the relevant sections in the Adams article in order to understand how to code new references and how to create the notes properly. Cullen328 (talk) 14:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice find and a nice little addition to the John Muir piece. Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 01:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. See here. Daniel Case (talk) 15:44, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Gert7 (talk) 08:30, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gert7, I appreciate you noticing the article I wrote last night, but am not sure why you proposed Whoa Nellie Deli for speedy deletion, as the article I wrote included no promotional material from the restaurant itself or even paraphrases of such material. Instead, I used neutral language and relied on quotations from 7 relaible sources to establish notability. Those included the New York Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Los Angeles Times and the San Diego Union-Tribune. These aren't just home town blurbs. Quoting relaible sources is not advertising. I also quoted national magazines like Gourmet and The Atlantic. As a point of fact, I have no connection with the restaurant other than as a satisfied customer. Did you actually read the article and look at the references that clearly establish notability? Fortunately, someone else disagreed with your proposal and removed the flag. I am sure that you acted in good faith but am curious as to your reasoning. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 15:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this crisis has passed, but as Ettamogah Pub has been on wiki for years, I think this is comparable, and even more unique. I mean, if we have an article on, say, Antoine's, we need balance, right? ;-) Now, the local Mexican place in my town that's connected to a gas station is also tasty, but not yet notable when compared to this! Perhaps they can take inspiration..LOL!. Montanabw^(talk) 04:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen, I have been digging around in the packing and guiding articles and have arrived at the conclusion that the whole area is an ungodly mess of stubs, starts and disorganization! My own interest and time is a bit limited to spearhead an improvement drive, but I'd be glad to weigh in and help as I can on any bright ideas for organizing it all (such as making outfitter into a disambiguation page for all the different kinds and a new article for the horse-packing guide variant...). Montanabw^(talk) 04:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cullen!

I'm just launching Maurice Sugar right now, working off Johnson's biography as the main source. If you'd like to help wale away at it, feel free. I'm not finding a death date, for one thing — and my interest is primarily in the early years, so if you've got any interest in the later period, maybe I can take care of up to 1920 or something and you can work on the later phase.

If you'd like to email me directly, feel free: MutantPop@aol.com

best regards,

Tim Davenport Corvallis, OR

Carrite (talk) 15:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dude,

I made a comment partially directed at you on Talk:Ahmed Yassin, that I think got lost due to the discussion taking on a life of its own. Do you think I could press you for an answer?

From Talk:Ahmed Yassin

In an an attempt to build consensus (and get this issue over with), I will narrow my opinion to Support Option 1, cropped as a portrait of the subject. Showing the wheelchair is OK with me. Cullen328 (talk) 00:57, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Am I the only one that think Yassin looks somewhat sickly and googly eyed in this picture? NickCT (talk) 01:53, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks NickCT (talk) 14:30, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to call me Jim, which is my real name. I should let you know that my opinion on the appearance of disabled people is affected by the fact that I have a 20 year old son with moderate disabilities. He has classmates with severe disabilities, so I've had more chances than most people to get beyond the appearance issues. As I said on the talk page, I think the 3 options are all better than the image now used, which I think shows the man's appearance at its worst. People with severe vision problems often look "googly eyed" which isn't a very neutral term. He was, by definition, sickly. So photo 1 isn't my favorite but I am trying to build consensus for improvement. I didn't think your question was directed specifically at me, and the conversation was moving fast. That's why I didn't respond earlier. Thanks. Cullen328 (talk) 14:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jim,

1) Please accept my apologies for the use of the term "googly eyed". You were understating it when you said that it "isn't a very neutral term". It is in fact a terribly insensitive term, and was used too lightly. I have nothing but the greatest respect for people living w/ disabilities and those who help them.

2) I think there are a lot of biographical pages about politicians/important figures who were sick and/or disabled at some point in thier life. I think in general, most images offered for such people are usually respectful in that they don't press the point that person was sick and/or disabled. It strikes me that option 1 from Talk:Ahmed Yassin does make him appear rather sickly and decrepit. Option 3 on the other hand shows he is disabled, but makes him look somewhat more stately.

Can you see the point I'm trying to make, or do you think I'm off-base? NickCT (talk) 15:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted and not really needed because it wasn't in main space. Option 1 is not my personal favorite but I am willing to make concessions to get consensus for changing the current one. I am inexperienced with these debates and surprised how hard it is to move forward. Your opinion is valid. Thanks. Cullen328 (talk) 18:07, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an I/P (Israel/Palenstine) topic. Virtually anything related to I/P topics becomes the source of much dispute, rancor and WP:BATTLEGROUNDing. NickCT (talk) 18:14, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I somewhat understand but I guess I would understand better if the issue had clear substance favoring one side or the other. I will probably move on soon to better things (as defined by me). Cullen328 (talk) 18:51, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My take on it is that Avi (a typically pro-Israeli editor) is looking to represent Yassin (a sworn enemy of Israel) in an aestheticly unpleasing light. NickCT (talk) 18:56, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but I don't see any benefit to the Israeli point of view. I'm an advocate for NPOV in all cases, at least on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 19:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You don't see the benefit of portraying your enemies as ridiculous? Have you ever seen propaganda posters? Don't they are portray the enemy in comical characticture?

I applaud your advocacy! NickCT (talk) 20:01, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent point, but the guy has been dead 6 years. This isn't 1942 and he isn't Tojo. As I noted yesterday, the lead photos of Hitler and Stalin et al are neutral. Cullen328 (talk) 22:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not too sure I understand the counter point. Hamas is very much alive. Yassin was the founder of Hamas. Is it not reasonable to assume that if I wanted to discredit Hamas I might attempt to make its founder look silly? NickCT (talk) 00:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since our last exchange, I noticed that the same image is used in the Hamas article. I read a bit of that article's talk page. I understand your point better now. Cullen328 (talk) 00:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your ear Cullen328. I think you get the point that the issue of this picture could be mired in all sorts of I/P POV issues. NickCT (talk) 00:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, Just wondering whether you might have any info on James Eccles, about whom I've just started a page. He seems to have done a fair bit in the Rockies. I don't have any books on US mountaineering, whilst I imagine that you have quite a few. Any new info gratefully received. Best wishes, Ericoides 08:41, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking. My detailed knowledge is about California and the Sierra Nevada. I've never climbed in Wyoming which is a very long 2 day drive from where I live (but would love to). The best overall survey of U.S. mountaineering history I own doesn't mention Eccles. By the way, that book, Climbing in North America, was written in 1976 by a British climber/author, Chris Jones.

Back to Eccles. Available online is a book published by the National Park Service called Grand Teton NP: A Place Called Jackson Hole. Chapter 16 by Reynold G. Jackson is called "Park of the Matterhorns". The whole chapter is fascinating and there is a lengthy paragraph about Eccles' attempt. I Googled "james eccles grand teton" and it was #2 right after your article.

I am researching and replying on a smart phone which is great but a bit awkward. I will be back at my computer and book collection in about 12 hours and will scout around more then. Cullen328 (talk) 15:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I recognized the name Harry Yount in your article. What a character! Cullen328 (talk) 16:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

C. Douglas Milner describes Eccles as a climber of "exceptional calibre" and his guides as "the finest that Chamonix could provide at that time" in Mont Blanc and the Aguilles, p. 74, 1955, Robert Hale Limited, London. My copy has no ISBN. Cullen328 (talk) 05:06, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Milner says Eccles failed in an attempt on the Peutery ridge on July 28, 1877, but tried again two days later, succeeding in a very fast time. He also describes Eccles failing an attempt in 1875, intimidated by the Innominata face. Back in London, while walking down the Strand, he saw a telephoto showing Mont Blanc and that amphitheater taken from Crammont displayed in a shop window. This photo revealed the best exit from the amphitheater, by the couloir to the Peutery ridge. Milner implies that photo was the key to success of the climb. All on page 75. Cullen328 (talk) 05:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for that wealth of info, invaluable. I'll try and fit it into the article. Regards, Ericoides 06:51, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re Eckenstein, I think there's something in a Winthrop Young biography I have, as well as a Younghusband biog. Plus a passage in Eric Newby's A Short Walk in the Hindu Kush (about the Eckenstein boulder in Snowdonia). I'll have a rummage tomorrow, it's late now. Crowley biogs have more, of course. Ericoides 21:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In The Throne Room of the Mountain Gods by Galen Rowell is about K2 mountaineering, and has some very interesting information about Eckenstein (and Crowley as well). I am particularly interested in elaborating on his efforts to improve mountaineering equipment and techniques. Cullen328 (talk) 21:43, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many of my books are still in storage but I found this (btw, JP means justice of the peace). "Early in 1907 Geoffrey was voted on the committee of the Climbers' Club, the club for Snowdonia climbers, and immediately he was in action. His Journal notes: "Made a brilliant (!) speech at their dinner, with Charles Trevelyan and Francis Acland as my guests, who also spoke. Helped to settle the Eckenstein-Abraham row over the Abrahams' North Wales book." Oscar Eckenstein was an impressive but odd man, one of the very few who could get along with "the great beast", Aleister Crowley. A railway engineer by profession, he was a veteran climber with an original and inventive mind, a pioneer of balance climbing and a pioneer, too, of the use of crampons on snow and ice. Like many of the Snowdonia climbers, he hated publicity, believing that their sport should remain private and exclusive. The Abraham brothers of Keswick, George and Ashley, had grown up in a very different tradition. They were professional photographers and took the view of their Lake District mentor, O. G. Jones, that climbing was such fun that everybody should be told about it and encouraged to have a go. In 1906 the brothers published a book, Rock Climbing in North Wales, crammed with accounts of adventures on the cliffs of Snowdonia and illustrated by their superb photographs. This would have been enough to upset Eckenstein but, compounding the offence, one passage in the book, [94] about an early attempt on the Devil's Kitchen, vividly described his assault on the crux wall and "pricipitate retreat". An incensed Eckenstein introduced a resolution at the Club's annual meeting, the exact terms of which have not been recorded. The tenor, however, is obvious. Ashley Abraham stood up to plead that he and his brother had intended no personal offence. Eckenstein was finally persuaded to withdraw his resolution." Hankinson, Alan (1995). Geoffrey Winthrop Young: Poet, Educator, Mountaineer, Hodder & Stoughton, 1995, pp. 93–4. In a later passage in the same book, Eleanor Slingsby (daughter of Cecil Slingsby), gives this brief portrait of OE. "I remember Eckenstein very well at the 1911 party, hammering things in the hall and smoking his awful pipe tobacco. He had a bushy beard at that time and was regarded as something of a prophet figure." (p. 119) On p. 233 Hankinson notes that OE, together with Farrar and Collie, had helped GWY with his book Mountain Craft. If you have the time/energy you could also trawl through some of these threads on UKC (eg the one entitled "Who was the Brit mountaineer?"). Ericoides 09:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your work on OE is excellent, well done. If you have the time you could give more details on the OE-Abraham feud (the GWY above) after the sentence "though their relationship was not always smooth". For instance, "though their relationship was not always smooth, as may be in seen in the Eckenstein-Abraham row. This was caused by the publication of the Abrahams' North Wales guide in which Eckenstein was ... etc etc."; always nice to have specifics. This would then lead nicely into the North Wales material that follows. I'm afraid I don't know much about that period of the AC, although I know Whymper had trouble with the AC because he was considered a "swell" (a class distinction, I think). There is an excellent collection of essays called Mirrors in the Cliffs (ed Perrin) which, among many other good things, describes this period; many decades later, as the Edward Lisle Strutt article says, "... 1927–37, these being the years – according to Alan Hankinson – in which 'the Alpine Club [...] had declined into a stuffy, snobbish, backward-looking institution. Its dominant figure was Colonel E. L. Strutt [...] for many years the autocratic and outspoken editor of the Alpine Journal. His views were rigid and intolerant. The only decent and honourable way to climb was the way in which he had climbed as a young man. Crampons were inadmissible; pitons anathema." Ericoides 07:52, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and I agree that the conflict with the Abrahams brothers is illuminating. Perhaps a case where OE was the conservative one - opposing guidebooks especially if one's own accomplishnents were criticized a bit. I'm also interested in mountain photographers such as the brothers. I wrote Tom Frost and improving Ansel Adams is an ongoing effort. Cullen328 (talk) 14:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you might be right. Perhaps he asked for a serviette rather than a napkin. Most of what I know about California comes either from the Grateful Dead or Curb Your Enthusiasm. The only time I visited I was 6 years old. Ericoides 12:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying me about the comments - Cheers 1812ahill (talk) 13:18, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have made a start on this and will expand it further as and when I have time. Normally I focus on the mountains of Germany and Austria rather than people, but this looks quite interesting. --Bermicourt (talk) 06:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your excellent work. Cullen328 (talk) 07:03, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and do it. You may have to use accent marks, however Purplebackpack89 17:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You did right, thought you probably didn't need to give that much information.   Will Beback  talk  03:08, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just make sure that you don't violate 3RR yourself.   Will Beback  talk  21:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coal is a dirty energy source, but what are the men and women that produce coal supposed to do for work if it is fased out? There arent many jobs in our coal mining areas, and coal is a source of income that pays good so we can provide for our families. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eb17816 (talk • contribs) 13:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Our job here on Wikipedia is to write an encyclopedia from a neutral point of view, backed up by verifiable references. Your personal opinions simply don't belong in articles. Cullen328 (talk) 16:04, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see any links or references regarding "T. M. Herbert" or "TM Herbert" in the article, and assumed it was a common violation of the Wikipedia Manual of Style. If you can document that it should be "TM Herbert", have at it and change it, but note the peculiar lack of punctuation with an embedded comment so it doesn't get changed again needlessly. —Quicksilver^{T @} 05:55, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(writing to your talk page, as "last edit" may be easier to pick up on a cell phone).

What were trying to do on Sierra Club? Your last edit seems only to have touched the semiprotect tag. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I got it. Look at this edit of mine. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:22, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Comment posted here in response to your message at the Village Pump because second-class netizens can't post there.)

Back when I still had an account, I got these automated welcome messages consistently once every three or four months. They weren't fully automated, because someone had to decide I was new and come template my talk page (honestly, after nine months and three messages, you start to view these things as juvenile insults--"Welcome, User!" for the fourth time? Really, now...), but they were automatically generated and that's what counts.

An automatic message like that will never look friendly to anyone even remotely familiar with the modern era. We're used to dismissing out of hand any kindness bestowed by a machine because we know that machines have no feelings and, more often than not on the 'Net, are programmed to lie to us.

The only "Welcome, User!" message I ever received that meant anything was a very short one, hand-typed, by another user. Even though an initial, fully-automated message that arrives the moment an account is created would avoid the suspicion born by those later, semi-automatic messages ("Is he serious? I've been doing this for two years. Jackass."), it would still be a message from a heartless machine that honestly just isn't happy to have you here--because, really, it can't feel happiness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.19.84.33 (talk) 19:00, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The thread's been dead for a week now, but I doubt anyone would object to you tagging some of your suggestions as high using BOLD Purplebackpack89 18:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jim,

I don't have Chris Jones' book anymore, so I am unable to check the pages 275-276 which you cited, to see if it is one of his mistakes, or if it is a misinterpretation. Thanks for explaning the revert, though.

The party which did the second ascent of the Nose in September 1960 was these 4 people: Royal Robbins, Tom Frost, Joe Fitschen, and Chuck Pratt. There is actually a commemoration of this event this weekend in Yosemite.

Here is a primary reference (article by Royal Robbins): Sierra Club Bulletin, December 1960, scan posted here: http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/1207521/The-Nose-Second-Ascent-50th-RR-Pratt-Frost-Fitschen-1960

Another: Royal Robbins - Spirit of the Age, Pat Ament, p.38-49.

non-primary reference: Fifty Classic Climbs of North America, Steve Roper, Allen Steck, p.266.

Another: Beyond the Vertical, Layton Kor, p.148.

Yvon Chouinard, Warren Harding, Janie Taylor and about 20 other people did hike to the top to meet the team of 4.

Yvon Chouinard and Dennis Hennek did the 10th ascent of the Nose in 1967 - that was his first time up the Nose, but not his first time up El Capitan. Here is a list of the first 17 ascents: 1- 1958 Warren Harding, Wayne Merry, & George Whitmore 2- 1960 Royal Robbins, Joe Fitschen, Chuck Pratt, & Tom Frost, seven days 3- 1963 Steve Roper, Layton Kor, & Glen Denny, three and a quarter days. 4- 1965 Gary Colliver, Richard McCracken, & John Evans 5- 1966 Dave Dornan, Dick Williams & Ants Leemets 6- 1966 Galen Rowell & Tom Fender 7- 1966 Jacques Dupont & Andre Gaunt, 6 days 8- 1967 Ken Boche & Don Lauria, 7 days 9- 1967 Jim Madsen & Kim Schmitz, 3 days 10- 1967 Dennis Hennek and Yvon Chouinard, 3 Days 11- 1967 Pat Ament & Tom Ruitch, 12- 1967 Don McPherson & Ron Burgner 13- 1968 Jim Logan & Wayne Goss 14- 1968 Jose Luis Fonrouge (Argentina) & Rick Sylvester 15- 1968 Jim Bridwell & Bill Stanton 16- 1968 Mick Burke & Rob Wood 17- 1968 Jim Madsen (again) & Mike Covington see the March 6, 2010 post by BooDawg (Ken Boche) here: http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=712787&tn=0

I believe Yvon also did the first "clean" (without using a hammer) ascent of the Nose in 1973 with Bruce Carson.

- Clint —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClintCummins (talk • contribs) 21:37, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cullen, note that I took a stab at seeing if the wikigods will accept fair use portraits of the various Varians, and to that end, uploaded some images of the brothers (taken by Ansel Adams, no less) to Varian Associates. I'd be glad to help if I can. I also dribbled some stuff into the Ansel Adams article (which I think you worked on too?) Anyway, you may want to check out the notes I have on Russell and Sigurd at User:Montanabw/Sandbox 2, mostly copy and paste from some other sources, but the URLs are there with the excerpts I thought relevant. The timeline on the history of Silicon Valley is significant, and the Hammond book on Ansel Adams (sourced in the John Varian article) has stuff on Russell. My stake in all of the above is that I created the article Sheila Varian, their niece, the horse breeder. Russell's wife Dorothy helped bankroll the horse ranch in its early years. It's sort of taken off from there. Fascinating family. Montanabw^(talk) 00:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I haven't had the time to figure the whole family tree out, but these people Sheila's cousins, Jack is a son of Sigurd and has a blog going about conservation easements and such. Montanabw^(talk) 00:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC) Follow up: On that note, see [3], [4], [5],[6] and [7][reply]

...for your note on my essay. Appreciate that! I'm always a little surprised when someone finds it, and pleased if anyone finds it useful. All the best, Antandrus (talk) 14:20, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added, to the article, G.W. Trompf's summary of major views and paradigms of historic recurrence.

Thanks for your constructive suggestions for improving the article. Nihil novi (talk) 11:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Cullen328 (talk) 21:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The date, length and hook of the expanded article of Harry Yount has been verified. However, the image presently at Commons does not match the NPS source you originally specified. Do you know where the current image came from? KimChee (talk) 23:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The original image was uploaded to Commons back in 2006, long before I got involved. While working on researching Yount in recent weeks, I was searching for a better quality version of the image. The best I found was part of Google's archive of LIFE magazines photos. Since it is a 19th century image, I concluded that it is in the public domain, as did the original uploader. I uploaded the highest resolution version I could find, but it had a LIFE watermark. I then uploaded a somewhat lower resolution version from LIFE, without the watermark, but still better than the NPS version. I thought I had properly updated the Commons data, but have gone back and made sure that it shows LIFE's archive as the intermediate source. The photo, of course, was taken long before LIFE magazine was founded. By the way, it isn't accurate to say that the photo was taken by a NPS employee, as it was taken long before the NPS was founded. I believe that it was taken by a photographer working for the Hayden Survey in the 1870s. That survey was funded by the U.S. Department of the Interior, so the photo is almost certainly a work of the U.S. government. However, I haven't been able to verify the exact origins of the photo. Cullen328 (talk) 01:39, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To confirm PD status for DYK usage, it would help to determine whether the photo had been published before 1923 or if it had in fact been part of the Hayden Survey. The date is in a gray area where it is uncertain whether an unknown photographer would have been dead for at least 70 years. Here is a book that states that William Henry Jackson had taken at least one of the photos of Yount during the Hayden survey (that image from the USGS appears to be clear to use). KimChee (talk) 02:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out Jackson has only been dead about 68 years, but if the photo(s) can be attributed to him with certainty, then public domain could be claimed under {{PD-USGov-Interior}}. KimChee (talk) 02:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that this iconic portrait is not by Jackson, though the distance shot of Yount in mountain scenery is by Jackson. The portrait is, however, by another employee of the Department of the Interior.

The earliest publication date for this photo that I can verify is 1928, in the book, "Oh, Ranger!" by Albright and Taylor, which is reference 1 in the Wikipedia article. I own a copy of the 2nd edition printed in 1929, but unfortunately it does not have any photo credits - just a brief caption.

The best information I can find about the source of the photo is in the frontispiece of the following book, which I found on Google Books:

National Park Service Uniforms: In Search of an Identity, 1872-1920

R. Bryce Workman

DIANE Publishing

1994

ISBN 9780788187919

Workman writes, "Photograph was taken by William Henry Holmes while both were employed on the Ferdinand Vandiveer Hayden geological survey in 1873, Yount as guide and Holmes as illustrator. William Henry Jackson was the official photographer, but apparently Holmes also dabbled in this medium. NPSHPC - William Henry Holmes photo HFC/91-16"

The photo is described in detail on page 1 of the book, and descriptions of other photos of Yount follow.

I hope that this is adequate to show that the photo is a work of the U. S. government and in the public domain. Cullen328 (talk) 04:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This looks very sufficient to me. I also cleaned up the portrait in Commons. KimChee (talk) 04:09, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I moved the caption from the book into the reference citation below the license boxes. KimChee (talk) 04:36, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Suggested ALT1: ... that Harry Yount (pictured) killed 70 antelope in one day during a hunting competition, but was ashamed because "it went against his heart to kill so many innocent creatures just for the glory"? KimChee (talk) 05:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The revised wording that you suggest is fine with me. Thanks again. Cullen328 (talk) 06:07, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article. Ericoides (talk) 01:00, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for improving my prose, Ericoides. Cullen328 (talk) 01:03, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This has been added to the DYKLIST for December 2010 as the article got 11,900 views. KimChee (talk) 04:43, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment on the photo. I think the license should be OK now. I put a similar picture of Dick McGowan up on his article. Jack-z (talk) 01:27, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

... is at User:Cullen328/List of Underground Press Syndicate members. Sorry for the wait. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:24, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing like writing a great article to open other editors eyes! Congratulations! Student7 (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it looks great and is very comprehensive for its genera of article. You should consider nominating it for GA status. I suspect it would pass without much ado. --Mike Cline (talk) 23:35, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the project. --Kumioko (talk) 00:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I rewrote the material to put it into a more logical flow. I think it's worth including, but I wish it could be combined into a general history section rather than standing on its own, which tends to give it additional weight. However there isn't such a section right now, so a standalone section is perhaps the next best solution. We might revisit the material in a few weeks to see if there have been any further developments. If not, it could be minimized further.   Will Beback  talk  22:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind comments. I wish I was quite as patient as you describe me, but I do try for as far as my tether will stretch! I very much appreciate your comments about Srebrenica and the Srebrenica genocide article. There has been an ongoing campaign of denial, driven by political and other considerations, that has made the article a bit of a battleground. The disputes have been slightly less energetic since the International Court of Justice rescued Serbia from the threat of reparations, but sadly there is still considerable residual conflict over the facts. The article could do with more tidying up but at the moment circumstances prevent me concentrating on dealing with more serious matters so I get distracted into discussions on subjects of perhaps lesser weight that I still think should be treated with adequate respect. All the best, Owen Opbeith (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC) After a losing battle over the deletion of John Monk MBE (essentially I believe the UK Honours List recognition of long-term, exceptional but low media profile community service should be respected by Wikipedia as a reliable non-elitist measure of notability but ... you can guess the rest), someone referred me to the WP Notability discussion forum. I haven't the time or energy to take it up there but I came across your comments on the subject of red links. I endorse them completely. Opbeith (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for those words about the Honours List effort, Jim. I'm holding back till I feel ready to subject myself to exposure to the full fire of battle (the proposal's a loser, I'm certain, but it's justified, so that's no reason not to give it a try). And first, once I can settle back to proper concentration, I need to get back to another head-banging session at the Bosnian genocide article. Once the time comes, though, I'd be happy to have a chat about the basics of the UK Honours system (hopefully without rendering you catatonic). Opbeith (talk) 22:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say nice work on Grenville Anderson, looks like the article is now well on track to be kept, all thanks to your efforts. Jenks24 (talk) 08:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to add something that I think is useful to the article on the John Muir trail. The social networking site for the trail on Yahoo has a very extended collection of files and links related for the trail. E.g., Excel spreadsheets that give mileages, elevations and GPS coordinates of all trail junctions and campsites; information on permitting dates for each potential trailhead, equipment suggestions. I see the usual prohibition on links to social network (Yahoo, Facebook) groups, which makes some sense to me, but this particular networking site has the best collection I know of online info about the JMT - it is way more useful than many of the links that exist in the article, some of which merely describe a single person's account of hiking the trail. Any ideas of how to get around this problem. Not a registered user - please respond to JohnLadd@Gmail.com (or I'll come back here to look for ideas) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.103.211.28 (talk) 15:56, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello John and thank you for trying to improve the John Muir Trail article. I encourage you to get more involved, and help make the article better. However, Wikipedia has a clear policy on external links to avoid, found at WP:LINKSTOAVOID item 10, which says that links to YahooGroups are not allowed. In my opinion, the article has too many external links now and a number of others should be removed. I recommend that you work on improving the article itself, which could certainly benefit from the input of an expert. I don't claim to be an expert because I've never hiked the full length, just a number of segments. More and better photos would be a good addition too. Cullen328 (talk) 16:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing and offering to help out. i had created a stub article a while back, which was turned into a redirect within a day. based on the content at that time, and assuming it could not have been expanded, it made some sense. but of course this publisher is a major influence on environmental issues. I added it back once i had enough to feel comfortable it would not be summarily removed. I think it needs a lot more work, and i of course may not get to it (being a volunteer with a life outside WP:)). I have tried to add a few of the SCB titles already mentioned on WP, but i think some of the works used as references here should be added as well. I think the fact that the dust jackets for the pictorials had ordering and membership information on the inside of them is notable. I basically collected old SCB's at thrift stores, and worked from the hard copies. Generally, coverage of publishers and books here is not on a par with music and record companies, or movies. This is a small start. PLEASE feel free to rewrite or reorganize the article, as i think this is one of my less well written articles. You probably couldnt do worse unless you tried...Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:38, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...like the discussion ending before I got there. Sorry I couldn't add my vote, and glad to see it was kept. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you say "keep but source" it'd be better if you actually added at least one of the sources you've found. I've seen this happen far too often: an article gets pile-on "keep but source" and no one ever gets around to doing it, leaving an unsourced nanostub. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:25, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I shall post my observations on the articles talk / discussion page. Please watch it. Incidentally, despite being a regular contributor to this article before the AfD I was not involved and opine the AfD process would have been better had it attempted to include prior "deletionist" inclined contributors also.RobertRosen (talk) 06:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will watch for your observations on the talk page, as I keep this article and others that interest me on my watch list. I did not start the AfD but noticed it, began researching the topic, and added sources. The edit history, as I read it, shows you made three edits within a three minute period last November. Is that what you mean by a "regular contributor" or am I missing something? Cullen328 (talk) 06:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you missed my 30th Nov edit :-) I also extensively edited a connected article Amitabh Thakur. To cut to the chase, I think both these articles should be extensively edited to somewhere between our respective present positions to satisfy 5P.RobertRosen (talk) 07:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might also like to search public yahoogroups for messages like this [8] which admit that NRF is a "small organisation" and this one which is even more revealing [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti4ngo/message/2967. They have blanked out the names with XXX and YYYs which are available freely elsewhere. RobertRosen (talk) 07:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These Yahoogroup postings are repugnant rumormongering that have no place on Wikipepdia. You have weakened your case in my eyes by linking to these.Cullen328 (talk) 22:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am perfectly aware that YG is not a RS. I was clarifying the context of the individuals behind the NRF as you alluded to, and considering the pending sock report. In passing, do you plan to respond to my other concerns for that article, especially the issue that the sources do not back the sweeping claims made about NRF ? RobertRosen (talk) 08:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice now you have posted this previously [9] which referred to me in the context of this article and my deletions then. It is pertinent that very few of the links I removed then are back in the article. I dont think my edits, either then or now constitute vandalism. RobertRosen (talk) 09:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstood my question to Uncle G. I was not accusing you of vandalism. Instead, I was observing that you had accused another editor of vandalism in an edit summary of November 30, 2010, in which you wrote: "undid vandalism. SPS, NPOV, lack of reliable sources" when reverting an edit by Nutanthakurlko. I agree that this inexperienced editor, unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies, added SPS material, wrote in an POV fashion, and clumsily tried to use sockpuppets. However, all of her misguided edits were in good faith and none of her edits constituted vandalism. Please note that "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting patent nonsense into a page." Nutanthakurlko has not edited in six weeks or more. Her shortcomings as an editor are no longer relevant to the development of this article, unless she returns to the process. We can deal with that if and when it happens.

I don't think that your edits were in any sense vandalism, and assume good faith of your editing as I do of Nutanthakurlko. However, I perceive that you have a negative POV regarding the National RTI Forum, for whatever reason. Despite your personal POV, you have an obligation to edit this article in an NPOV fashion, and to base any observations about the topic on reliable sources, rather than your own opinions or personal observations. If you will work with me in a collaborative way, maybe we can agree on a good article on this topic. Let's try. Cullen328 (talk) 22:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You characterized the following sentence as containing "extraordinary claims": "National RTI Forum is a grassroots anti-corruption organization in India that advocates for government openness under the terms of the 2005 Right to Information Act." To me, an "extraordinary claim" would be that a certain person lived to be 200 years old, or that an inventor had developed a perpetual motion machine, or that space aliens controlled the United Nations. My intent was to describe the National NTI Forum in a single sentence based on what I've read in the reliable sources, and I don't see what is so extraordinary about any of it. Please explain. Cullen328 (talk) 22:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have reliable access to internet now. Will talk later about this article. 12:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertRosen (talk • contribs)

Hello. You have a new message at Salegi's talk page.

Hello. You have a new message at salegi's talk page.

Thank you for the nice compliment. I also feel it was a very good speech and historically significant. I realized after our discussion on the talk page that the sentence still didn't describe Wills' opinion fully, so I tweaked it. Glad you like it! and Happy Trails! (and thank you for all the work you did making it a good article). --Kenatipo ^speak! 16:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I struck my AfD comments that you were referring to. I was a little annoyed at a few earlier discussions I had seen and that carried over. I didn't take the time to fully investigate before commenting on that one; nor did I have the tact I should when I made my comment. There were one or two !votes that I thought were SPA-ish, but I should have done my homework better. Thanks for calling me on it. Shadowjams (talk) 22:24, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your gracious comments are a credit to you. It is not easy for most of us to admit when we have made a mistake. Warmest regards. Cullen328 (talk) 22:34, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, My User name is Msujsj and I am currently involved in a Native American Law and Policy course at Montana State University that entails updating indian law related articles. I was wondering if you would be willing to be my ambassador in this endeavor for this Spring semester . I am not quite sure if this would something of interest to you, but if interested please let me know. Sincerely, Msujsj — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msujsj (talk • contribs) 04:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would be happy to be your mentor. Please tell me a little bit about you, and what your goals are with regards to learning about Wikipedia. Do not hesitate to ask me anything, and I will do my best to be of assistance.

Hint - sign your talk page messages by typing four tildes (~~~~). That will generate an automatic signature with a link to your user page and your talk page. You won't have to type your user name.

Best Regards, Jim

Cullen328 (talk) 05:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm a Campus Ambassador in the Public Policy Initiative and found your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Online Ambassadors and was wondering whether you'd be up for mentoring User:JLapka, one of the students for Prof Gen's Environmental Policy class. I'll watch this page. Thanks! Dcoetzee 22:23, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I agreed to mentor two and just heard from the first yesterday. So, yes, and have the student contact me. Cullen328 (talk) 23:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, when I talked to Sage he said I should ask you to introduce yourself to the user on their talk page and add the {{WAP student}} template, something like this: {{WAP student|project=WikiProject United States Public Policy|course=Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Courses/Environmental_Policy_spring_2011_(Gen)|coursetalk=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Courses/Environmental_Policy_spring_2011_(Gen)|mentor=Cullen328}}. This should be a bit easier since the student doesn't know their way around yet. Please let me know if you want to do anything differently. And thank you for your help! Dcoetzee 00:37, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. I am away from my office and responding on a smart phone. I will get in touch in a few hours. Cullen328 (talk) 01:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, no big rush. Dcoetzee 02:21, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would you be interested in taking me on for the online ambassador program? I'm working under the the Wikipedia Ambassador Program and Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy, studying federal Indian law at Montana State University. I'm considering focusing my Wikipedia project on the Wyoming v. United States 1989 Supreme Court case dealing with water rights leasing. Chris.arneson (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim. I am taking an environmental policy class at San Francisco State University and my class is participating in the United States Public Policy WikiProject. Our project for the class will be to create or contribute to a Wikipedia article on a public policy issue of our choice. I was told that you will be my online mentor for the semester and I have a question that I am hoping you can help me out with. I would like to know what the accepted practice is for using content from other Wikipedia articles.

The topic I will be writing about is the application of the Clean Air Act to greenhouse gases. I am in the process of writing a portion of my article and there is a particular section of the article "Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency" which I think is well written and relevant to the piece I am working on. I don't want to simply include a link to the other article or transclude the entire article into my own, and am wondering if it is acceptable to simply copy and paste a portion of the other article into my own. If so, do I need to cite to the other article or otherwise indicate that it is a quote? I want to avoid any issues associated with plagiarism and am not quite sure what to do in this instance. Thank you for any advice you can provide. JLapka (talk) 06:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of issues to be considered here, and I don't claim to be an expert on these issues, so please check out and verify my advice on your own. These are my opinions. First of all, a given Wikipedia article, since it is a product of a user edited website, can't itself be considered as a reliable source for another Wikipedia article. On the other hand, the Wikipedia content is freely licensed, so the writing can be re-used or copied as long as the content is supported by reliable sources. You won't have any copyright issues, but if you incorrectly represent the writing as your own, you may have some plagiarism issues. Be certain that the source of the writing is identified properly. I think the main challenge for you will be to read the reliable sources that back the language in the article you want to use, to verify for yourself that the content is really justified and fully supported by those reliable sources. After you have read and verified those reliable sources, then you are perfectly free to use them in another article. I think that I would recommend to you that you re-write or paraphrase the content in your own words, reflecting your own understanding and interpretation of those reliable sources, so that you have made your own specific encyclopedic contribution to an understanding of the unique issues in the article you are working on. Please feel free to ask a follow-up question if anything I have written is unclear to you. I will think about this more, and may have more to add tomorrow. Thank you for your question. Cullen328 (talk) 07:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some personal information: After about five semesters at the City College of San Francisco, I completed two semesters at San Francisco State University before finishing my bachelor's degree at the University of San Francisco. You may notice that all the colleges I attended were located in San Francisco. I love that city, where my wife and both my sons were born. Unfortunately, I was born in Detroit. Cullen328 (talk) 07:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information Jim. It helped to get me started. JLapka (talk) 03:16, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi buddy. Wikipedia doesn't seem to want me to edit pages tonight. I suspect that anonymous editors are restricted now to one edit per page for a time period or something, which is pretty useless really! I couldn't even go back to re-edit my own talk page just now. So sorry for the delay in responding - I've been trying to work the problem out! Here is what I had written. Feel free to copy and paste it to the relevant article and discuss further. Thanks.

I am over thirty years old and, although I am not an expert nor a climber, I have seldom heard this tool referred to by experts and non-experts alike, as an ice axe. That's not to say it isn't referred to as such. However, it is also referred to as an ice pick. Perhaps you both should have discussed it before you made the reverts, AND perhaps informed me of the debate.

Here are some links to people who use the term ice pick, some of which also use the word axe.

• "using an ice pick to ascend"
• "Ganoga ice pick" - discovery of old ice picks
• "fell off a mountain and impaled himself on his ice pick"
• (video of) "Ice climber loses his ice pick at Tiffany Falls"
• "Ice Pick mountain climbing thing"
• "helmet, ice, ice climbing, ice pick, jacket, mountain, mountaineer,"
• Sir Ranulph Fiennes "has difficulty holding a normal ice pick in his left hand"
• "The typical ice climber will carry with him, or her, ropes and harnesses, an effective ice pick,"
• "Another, decorated with an ice pick and the declaration ‘I chose to climb’,"

I'd be willing to bet the decoration referred to in the last link isn't merely the tip or head of the tool proper, but the whole tool, as a whole.

Now I'm sure there are many more examples. But I believe the generic name (in some places outside the USA certainly) is ice pick. I also believe it is probably more of a laymans' term, but popular enough to include in this article. The experts' name might well be ice ax(e). I don't know if this is a recent adoption or from the early days of mountaineering.

Also, this think about what Trotsky was killed by - I don't believe it was an error at all. It's just the name by which the tool had been generically known back in the day.

I am also not sure about how many different locations throughout the world use the term ice pick, as opposed to an exclusive usage of the term ice axe (or ax) to refer to the whole tool. So I could very well be wrong about it being American English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.130.116 (talk) 05:12, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IE8 seems to be working for me, so I'll copy and paste myself, with some additions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.130.116 (talk) 05:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your efforts here, and I concede that a mountaineering ice axe is sometimes incorrectly called an "ice pick", which the article already mentioned with regards to the Trotsky murder weapon. The key word there is "incorrectly".

Here on Wikipedia, we have to rely on reliable sources. Let's take a look at the reliability of your sources in order:

Source #1 is a caption on a stock photo website. This is not a reliable source for mountaineering terminology, as there is no evidence that the person who wrote the caption has any mountaineering expertise.

Source #2 is an item about something that is not a mountaineering tool, although the photo is fascinating. The item was found at the bottom of a lake that had a history of commercial ice making. The term "ice pick" is associated with domestic ice chipping tools from the days before mechanical refrigeration. This has no relevance to mountaineering.

Source #3 is a news story written by a reporter who is not a mountaineering expert, and accordingly, the article is not a reliable source for mountaineering terminology. The article uses both "pick" and "axe", and pick is the proper term for the part of the axe that caused the injury.

Source #4 is a YouTube video, which is in no way, shape or form a reliable source on Wikipedia for technical terminology.

Source #5 is a blog post related to a video game, and has no real world relevance to mountaineering terminology.

Source #6 is a list of key words associated with a stock photo. These lists include everything but the kitchen sink, and are not a reliable source for mountaineering terminology.

Source #7 is better than the previous sources, but is an article by a "culture and society" correspondent. There is no evidence that this reporter has mountaineering expertise.

Source #8 is a website domain name that is for sale, and dealers for these domain names will fill the space with roughly plausible material that is not fact checked. I know because I once bought one myself and transformed it into a genuine and accurate website. This is not at all a reliable source.

Source #9 is another example of a journalist, Carolyn Fry, who is not a mountaineering expert, inadvertently misusing technical terminology in an article about the history of the Alpine Club. It is not an article about mountaineering equipment, and the mention is in passing.

The simple fact is that in every English-speaking country, such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, the United States, New Zealand and also in English speaking outposts in every mountaineering locale in the world, the accepted English language term for the item discussed in this article is "ice axe". There is nothing "American" about the term. This is the term used in mountaineering magazines, journals and books published in all countries, and in the catalogs and websites of mountaineering equipment manufacturers and dealers worldwide. This is the term used by all active English speaking mountaineers. WP:UNDUE tells us that we don't highlight occasional erroneous usage by people who have no expertise in a given field. Cullen328 (talk) 05:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that "ice pick" is occasionally used, maybe mostly by non-climbers. But modern usage seems to be "ice axe". Scottish Mountaineering Club and the Mountaineering Council of Scotland both use "ice axe".   Will Beback  talk  06:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, axes aside, I've just seen your comment on Talk:Thomas Graham Brown. Yes, you are correct. I've just acquired a copy of Brenva so I'll be greatly expanding the article in the next few weeks. But see my rather weary comment on the Talk page. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The wheels of progress turn slowly. I will watchlist the page and look forward to your expansion. On another matter, I am 99% done with a biography of California mountain photographer Cedric Wright. That red link should turn blue sometime this weekend. Take care. Cullen328 (talk) 20:21, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few minor changes to Wright, mostly closing up the refs to the text immediately preceding them. Bit busy at the moment with work but will have a better look on Wednesday. Looking good, though. Ericoides (talk) 19:28, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent article on a worthy subject. Thanks for contributing that.   Will Beback  talk  21:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am honored by your positive feedback. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 22:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This message is going out to all of the Online Ambassadors who are, or will be, serving as mentors this term.

Hi there! This is just a friendly reminder to check in on what your mentees are doing. If they've started making edits, take a look and help them out or do some example fixes for them, if they need it. And if they are doing good, let them know it!

If you aren't mentoring anyone yet, it looks like you will be soon; at least one large class is asking us to assign mentors for them, and students in a number of others haven't yet gotten to asking ambassadors to be their mentors, but may soon. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hagafen.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,
Thank you for your note on my talk page. Please do tell how you propose that we 'work together'. I am new on Wikipedia and would love to have discussion about best practices and developing high standard content here, including the RTI related article that you have highlighted to me. Conceptually, I am a keen believer in every person's right to information(which is why I work at developing articles for Wikipedia) and would love to collaborate with you. Feel free to contact me via 'talk' page or email me from my user page. Look forward to getting more details from you.
abhishek singh (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I have read the article and its associated discussion page.

Jim, thanks again for being so encouraging to people. In the last few days I've bumped into people at Wikipedia who have been helpful and courteous beyond any expectation and I've also come across people who give the impression of being graduates from the school of playground bullying. I'm resilient enough to take care of myself, but a lot of people aren't. Your reassurance is the sort of thing that helps the less robust find the resolve not to be deterred. Opbeith (talk) 08:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I came across a situation where you seemed to be having a bit of a problem with a copyright issue. If you need a very solid opinion you might contact User:Moonriddengirl. She is knowledgeable and authoritative but also exceptionally helpful - one of the people who encourage me to keep faith with Wikipedia. However save the problem until you're really stuck because I think she's got quite a lot on hand to cope with. Opbeith (talk) 11:05, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jim! That's good work you've done on Kalpataru Day! Its barely crossed 20 revisions, and its already a well sourced, fairly large article. Keep the good work going. Regards, TheMike •^{Leave me a message!} 11:05, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, it's been a while since we spoke. Inspired by RTI (as we last spoke), I recently added an article on National RTI awards. Can you please lend me your expertise? Take a look at the article, improve it, give feedback or rate it, anyway that you can help, so that it can be up to Wikipedia's high standards. Your assistance is greatly appreciated
regards
abhishek singh (talk) 19:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As the major contributor to this article I am contacting you to let you know the article has failed GA review. Full notes are available on the talk page as well as a note about the article title.--Amadscientist (talk) 16:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense or vandalism, the article was clearly ripe for a speedy, so I'm not clear why the exact categorisation matters? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, Online Ambassador!

This is a quick message to all the ambassadors about marking and tracking which articles students are working on. For the classes working with the ambassador program, please look over any articles being worked on by students (in particular, any ones you are mentoring, but others who don't have mentors as well) and do these things:

1. Add {{WAP assignment | term = Spring 2011 }} to the articles' talk pages. (The other parameters of the {{WAP assignment}} template are helpful, so please add them as well, but the term = Spring 2011 one is most important.)
2. If the article is related to United States public policy, make sure the article the WikiProject banner is on the talk page: {{WikiProject United States Public Policy}}
3. Add Category:Article Feedback Pilot (a hidden category) to the article itself. The second phase of the Article Feedback Tool project has started, and this time we're trying to include all of the articles students are working on. Please test out the Article Feedback Tool, as well. The new version just deployed, so any bug reports or feedback will be appreciated by the tech team working on it.

And of course, don't forget to check in on the students, give them constructive feedback, praise them for positive contributions, award them {{The WikiPen}} if they are doing excellent work, and so on. And if you haven't done so, make sure any students you are mentoring are listed on your mentor profile.

Thanks! --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 18:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know to keep an eye out for anonymous vandals on the Wishna page. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 17:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up - I will add the article to my watch list this evening as I am responding on a smart phone and the button doesn't work on this interface for some reason. It doesn't look like true vandalism but rather POV pushing. You and I can make sure that doesn't succeed. I appreciate your concern. Cullen328 (talk) 18:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Sorry, looks like we edit-conflicted while trying to add sources. I'm done now, so if I broke anything you were adding, sorry about that! 28bytes (talk) 03:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, with a little more fleshing out, this might be a good WP:Did you know candidate. 28bytes (talk) 03:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hook approved! [10] Nice work on that article. 28bytes (talk) 23:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you have written about editing on smartphones. I often edit on a Android device, namely the Droid X. I am using one now. This allows me to make minor corrections and also participate in AfD debates when I am away from a computer. The limitations can be frustrating though, and I have had other editors say, "Why didn't you do so-and-so", such as put a reference into an article. That's almost impossible when you can't cut and paste. I wish I could do more, and wish there was a more robust Android editor available. Your thoughts? Cullen328 (talk) 06:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, I have an iPhone. It allows me to do just about any form of editing Wikipedia. Since I got it, I have actually done quite a lot of editing on it. It can get to the exact same screen as a regular computer, input all the same characters, and copy-paste as well. I have even created a few articles with it and managed to place references in them too. I'd say that the only thing I cannot do with it is to take a picture and place it on Wikipedia without the intervention of a regular computer.

Before my iPhone, I had a Blackberry-like phone that could sign in and edit. But it had a lot of limitations. It could not copy-paste, so I was unable to use it to move text between locations. Getting to anything that was not a letter or number character was tricky, especially the [[brackets for linking]] and {{templates}} and the vertical lines used within them. It was totally impossible to get the bullet • that is used in a lot of navboxes. It took three keystrokes on the tiny keyboard to get each ' when bolding or italicizing anything. Not to mention what I had to go through just to get the <ref></ref> tags.

Despite all these limitations, I managed throughout the time I had the device to compose with it lots of articles and edit many more. I was just happy to be able to do it at all. I edited with it constantly while away from home for part of the day, in various public places, on multi-day trips, even during a weeklong hospital stay. There were times when some event happened and I had it on Wikipedia within minutes.

Prior to the Blackberry-like device, I had a Motorola RAZR phone. I could not sign in on it at all. I could edit (but not create articles) with it . . . sometimes. Sometimes, it let me edit short articles using a random IP address from a certain range that varied each time. Other times, it would send me a message that I was blocked from editing, probably because that IP had a problem from someone else. It was frustrating because what I typed would be lost as a result. Not to mention, I had to input the text using the iTap method on a number key pad. I rarely edited this way at all.

Given all my smartphone experience, this has led me to do certain things. For one, I have pushed for grace periods in which new articles won't get deleted simply due to the lack of references. This is one reason why I created the template {{newpage}}. I have thought about creating a similar template just for smartphones to let others know that one created the page on their phone and would make improvements as soon as they get to a regular computer.

I also made a suggestion somewhere recently that there should be the ability to send a picture one takes with their camera phone straight to Wikipedia for uploading. IPhones allow videos to be sent directly to YouTube without an intervening computer. There should be something similar for pictures on Wikipedia. Sebwite (talk) 00:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cullen238,

I'm a grad student at the University of San Francisco and am working on the WikiProject United States Public Policy project to update and create public policy pages on Wikipedia. I'm completely new to the world of Wikipedia and am wondering if you could be my mentor.

Best regards, Elyane (Elsnthesea) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elsnthesea (talk • contribs) 00:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Elyane, feel free to ask any questions at all. Do you have specific articles in mind, new or existing?Cullen328 (talk) 01:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your insight on my resources re: the Chevron case. I agree, it's very opinionated. I do think it will serve as a good resource to find other resources.

Cheers,

Elsnthesea (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2011 (UTC)User:Elsnthesea[reply]

You just figured out how to indent properly. Very good. Cullen328 (talk) 20:15, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, It was a pleasure to meet you on Saturday. Thanks for all the good tips you provided for editing on Wikipedia. Sonam and I are coming along with our article. We actually decided to change our topic after your feedback and a conversation with Aaron. We're now writing about the California Truck and Bus Rule which is much more straight-forward. When you have a moment, could you take a look at what we have so far? It isn't much - just the background. But any thoughts on the format or the writing itself would be great! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Elsnthesea/sandbox

Thanks! Elsnthesea (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:46, 20 April 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the nice note. I just wish I was spending more time in the mountains.   Will Beback  talk  03:58, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. The gorgeous snow in the high country should last well into July, and the streams and the waterfalls will be gushing for a long time to come. Cullen328 (talk) 04:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim or Cullen238,