User talk:Valfontis

• Index of archives and temp pages

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Chemeketa Community College Rogue River Wars Nestucca River Western Oregon Yachats, Oregon Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians Central Oregon List of Oregon state forests Sahaptin language Crown Point (Oregon) John McLoughlin Bridge Yaquina Head Lighthouse PGE Park Shanghai tunnels Takelma language Coos River Salinan Alsea River Yaquina River

Cleanup Hualapai Benchmade Portland Shriners Hospital Merge Chinatown, Portland U.S. Route 101 List of numbered Routes in Oregon Add Sources Detroit, Oregon Aberdeen, Washington Aurora, Oregon Copyedit St. Mary's Cathedral (Portland) Expand Benny & Joon Kailee Wong Bellevue, Washington

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Cappy Thompson

Working on the article. See www.cappythompson.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attywilliams (talk • contribs) 00:26, November 5, 2006 (UTC)

Pacific Northwest

I'm writing to you as one of the people who contributed to this article. I hope I could contribute to defusing the emotional debate and I would appreciate if you could participate in the new effort of finding a good name for the article. — Sebastian (talk) 22:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I dunno, it's kinda scary over there. :) But I'll see what I can do. Thanks for your excellent efforts in straightening this all out! Katr67 23:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! — Sebastian (talk) 00:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

You can come back now - it's all clear now! — Sebastian (talk) 00:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I chickened out. I'm glad you were able to reach a decision without me. :) Hey, I'm going to clean out the touristy and unrelated stuff from the external links section right now, so if you're still working on the article drop me a note so we don't have an edit conflict. Katr67 02:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, it worked out fine! Too many cooks spoil the broth, anyway. I just noticed something else - see below. — Sebastian (talk) 06:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Pacific East Rim ecoregion

In the article Wealth, there is a sentence: "In ecologically rich areas such as those inhabited by the Haida in the Cascadia Pacific East Rim ecoregion, traditions like potlatch kept wealth relatively evenly distributed, ...". When I just disamb'ed Cascadia it occurred to me that "Pacific East Rim" seems quite redundant there. Maybe both this and "ecoregion" could be deleted, or should we create a separate article for it? — Sebastian (talk) 06:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Orenco & More

The Orenco/Station comment works for me. Thanks for beautifying the Old Scotch Church page, it looks great. I'm still learning the ins and outs of the Wiki formating. My new goal is tables! Question with references, my parents have a couple old plates that I think have info on Orenco's old school and the old church, any idea how to reference this sort of source? Thanks Aboutmovies 06:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Peer Review?

I was wondering if you might give me a peer review on Executive Order 9835, I just wrote it. You know, if you have time, I can return the favor, of course. Thanks A mcmurray 05:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

9835 and such

Thanks for doing the spell check and such. I would review that article for you if you ever post it. The DYK process is pretty easy. Just nominate an entry, mostly if it adheres to the criteria (inline citations, NPOV, etc) it goes to the Main DYK. The page to nominate entries is here. Sorry my response took so long, been away a few days. A mcmurray 18:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Picture

I noticed you requested a picture for Yaquina Bay Light, so I went out today and snapped a shot of it. Dark jedi requiem 01:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Awesome! It's a great pic--you certainly had good photography weather today. And I hope you had fun at the aquarium. Katr67 03:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! It was a pretty good day. I noticed you asked for the picture and decided to snap one since I live less than 10 minutes away. Both the aquarium and lighthouse was more of a trip for Wikipedia than anything else. I have loads more pictures to upload. :) In a round-about way I donated 6 bucks for camera batteries, and a couple dollars for gas to Wikipedia. (I get in the aquarium for free.) Better way than most to spend my birthday though! Thanks again, Dark jedi requiem 05:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Lucky! I want to live at the coast someday. Happy birthday! Katr67 05:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

History

Tried to get a pic of Mission Mill Museum yesterday, but my new camera malfunctioned. I'll try again Tuesday. Then after finals I'll finish up Champoeg Meetings, David Hill, Orenco, and then tackle Oregon Station. After that I'll see about coordinating with some other folks to flush out the History of Oregon pages.

Thanks for the award, and all the editing. Nice rock by the way, is that now of ProjectOregon?

As to stalking, its OK as long as there are no bunnies. But please don't try to kill Reagan to impress me. I'm happily married, and besides Reagan is dead. Though there is this one professor...

Aboutmovies 05:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. It's not an Oregon rock, but it rocks nonetheless. If I were of the sociopathic persuasion, there's a politician or two I'd rather take out first... Katr67 05:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Here are the pics, the are in wiki commons. Hopefully they work for you.

• Image:SalemORLeeHouse2.JPG
• Image:SalemORLeeHouse1.JPG
• Image:SalemORMissionMill4.JPG
• Image:SalemORMissionMill6.JPG
• Image:SalemORMissionMill5.JPG
• Image:SalemORMissionMill4.JPG
• Image:MissionMill3.JPG
• Image:SalemORMissionMill2.JPG
• Image:SalemORMissionMill1.JPG

Aboutmovies 23:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

These are great--thanks! I'm going to go slap a NRHP infobox on that puppy right now. Hopefully I can work on the article this weekend. Trying to figure out if I can use my tour guide training packet as a reference... Katr67 00:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Government article

As you probably noticed from my contributions list, I haven't done much tagging or other editing today. I didn't want you to think I'd burned out already. I finished the "survey" process I undertook, although I am quite sure that I have not yet found a way to do a full text search, but enough of that for now.

I spent most of today reading more than I ever wanted to know about Oregon government. (I never really cared which agencies were divisions of which other ones, or who reported to whom, but these become significant when organizing an article.) Anyway, I am getting a clearer picture, but the way my mind works, I think I would get further by doing some articles on the agencies and offices first, and then tackle Government of Oregon. Otherwise, it would be so speckled with redlinks it would drive me quite crazy.

So, unless you really want me to work top down, tomorrow, I'll start de-redlinking Government of Oregon as it reads now; do articles on the major Departments, and meanwhile continue to gather material for the "big" article.

Oh, and on entirely 'nother subject --- I grabbed my camera before running a few errands today, hoping to grab a snapshot of Old St. Peter's, even though it would have been against a grey sky. Unfortunately, when I got there, they had spread out a huge ugly banner in front of the place promoting an evening concert... not exactly the view I wanted. At least you know I haven't forgotten. -- J-M Jgilhousen 05:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Argh, you slacker. Actually, I managed to get away from the computer for several hours today myself. Knowing the names of all those agencies and their subdivisions used to be part of my job. Crazy boring stuff. You know the saying about knowing how sausage and laws are made? It's true. But all you really need to know is that the Oregon Department of Administrative Services (DAS) runs everything. And you may not have even heard of them. Scary huh? My NRHP stuff is on hold for the moment too--like you I'd rather take care of all the redlinked cities before I tackle the buildings in them. And now I think I'm off to write about Azalea--it's the last "A" name that's somewhat noteable... Katr67 06:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Rex T. Barber

Katr67, I apologize if that came across as uncivil. I meant it more towards Wikipedia in general than to you personally. We're all volunteers on here. I just see so much information on here that's unsourced, and so I found it a little ironic that something as apparently minor as this guy's involvement in a youth organization was insisted upon being sourced. But, this does follow Wikipedia's guidelines, and will respect such efforts in the future. EOBeav 19:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

No worries. You're right about there being a gazillion unsourced statements around here, but since someone had tagged that one, and then you said you knew it was true from personal experience, I couldn't let it slide. (I have reverted too many edits with summaries that say things like "This is true 'cos I was there, I saw the whole thing!" In fact, someone recently added something to an article about a situation where *I* was there, I saw the whole thing so I know it's true, but I slapped a {{fact}} tag on it anyway.) It's an uphill battle against entropy, but someone has to do it. :) So did you know the man? Sounds like he was a class act. Katr67 19:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I never knew him personally, but my brother has lived in the Madras/Culver area for quite a while, and has been familiar with Mr. Barber that way. My father and I were returning from the Bend area last summer when we crossed that bridge, and we had quite a discussion about Rex Barber. When I got home, I found that there was no article for him on Wikipedia, although his name was mentioned in the Admiral Yamamoto page. I went ahead and started one. I'm glad some other people have picked up the ball and run with it. You had mentioned something about the Oregon Wikipedia project. I will look into that a little further. I've also done some work on the pages for the towns of Hermiston and Athena.EOBeav 23:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC) <---Don't want to forget that!  :-)

Thanks

Hey, thanks for paying attention to the Oregon AFL-CIO page and for making some great edits. You have a great eye for detail. This is my first page and I'm figuring it out as I go along. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WikiGolightly (talk • contribs) 05:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

You're welcome! I try. Keep up the good work. Katr67 18:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Mayor of Garden Home-Whitford, Oregon

It isn't nonsense. I am the mayor of Garden Home. Do your research. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Comradeqsp (talk • contribs) 06:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

OK. Google search: "Dan Philo" + "Garden Home" = 0 hits. Can you direct me to some sources? Katr67 07:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Seaside Signal

Thank you for making the corrections on the Seaside Signal page. In the future I will refrain from editing it as it is a conflict of interest according to the guidelines. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thedudejessemullen (talk • contribs) 19:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Povey Bros.

I noticed you added Povey Bros. to your to-do list. I have some materials which might be useful in that regard. I've taken photos of all of the windows they installed in The Dalles Evangelical Church (not on the Historic Register), and intend to do the same for other installations in the gorge area (which include a couple other churches here in town and in Hood River, besides Old St. Pete's).

I could e-mail you what I have, or wait for you to get at least a stub up, and post them directly to your article, or perhaps you have another suggestion. -- J-M Jgilhousen 07:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. You might want to take a look at how little I've managed to actually write on Jim Redden. I'm keeping it in draft form in my User space until it's ready for more active collaboration. -- J-M Jgilhousen 07:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

My to-do list is a pipe dream, but since you have material, I'll try to get a stub up this weekend. I'm going to try to borrow my friend's digital camera and get some photos this weekend--one of the local historic districts is having an open house, and I'm sure there's some Povey Bros. stuff around here. Jim Redden is looking very good. Very interesting about the AIM controversy--I'll see if he got mentioned in In the Spirit of Crazy Horse by Peter Matthiessen. Katr67 18:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I know too well about pipe dreams. An occasional excursion into the world of the Poveys would provide me a welcome diversion from all the government and politics stuff. I think I'm gonna have to resort to creating some stubs in those categories... the redlinks are really distracting. -- J-M Jgilhousen 21:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Music of Oregon

Your comment on Wikipedia talk:Release Version Nominations has been duplicated to the right place : Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations/Set Nominations. Thanks for the help you provide to the V0.7 project. Lincher 20:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

John Day (1770-1820)

Hello! I have read your excellent postings, mainly on Oregon cities. For John Day (1770-1820), you changed the identifier from Hunter to Fur Trader. I originally wrote hunter because that was his primary occupation in the old Oregon Country. He was hired to hunt and provide game meat, first for the Pacific Fur Company's Overland Party in 1811-1812, and then at Fort Astoria from 1812-1814. Between 1814 and 1820 he was both hunting and trapping. He never acted in the capacity of "trader" in Oregon. I am going to change the identifier to "hunter and fur trapper." I'm writing a book on the man. Take care, and thanks for all your detailed contributions! --Nick Sheedy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by N.M.Sheedy (talk • contribs) 23:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

You're welcome and thanks for checking in. I think "hunter and fur trapper" is a little wordy, the identifier is mainly to help with disambiguation and I chose "fur trapper" for consistency with similar people, but if he wasn't a trapper, there is probably no need to include that part and you could go back to "hunter". I was just thinking it sounded kind of generic, I guess, and fur trader was more distinctive and more of his time and place, if that makes sense (whereas there might well be some guy around today named John Day who happens to be a hunter). Anyway, it might be worth asking at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people). It says that you should "try to limit to a single, recognisable and highly applicable word regarding the person at hand", so I'd say go with "hunter" for now, but perhaps something like "Oregon" might make him easier to identify? Or maybe (though it is more than one word) "Pacific Fur Company"? Katr67 05:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I see your point for the identifier for John Day and agree that "fur trader" is probably best, so as to link him with others in that field. I was perhaps splitting hairs with details. John Day was not a "trader"--he was a profesional hunter and later a freelance trapper. At that time, there was a legal distinction between fur traders, trappers and hunters. In the territory included in the Louisiana Purchase, and governed by the United States, it was illegal for any white men to hunt or trap commercially, and traders were allowed to trady with Indians only by license. As such, the industry generally set up trading posts and outfitted the Indians with traps and tools for hunting, and partered for pelts and skins. West of the rocky mountains, these legal restrictins did not apply, and the companies found that the indians were less willing to trap and trade, so they outfitted their own men to trap and hunt. John Day's occupation in the Oregon Country was as one of the lead hunters for the Pacific Fur comapany, and he supplied much of the meat to feed the company's men. He did some trapping after that, but was never a "trader" in the specific or legalsense of the occupation. Nick Sheedy 19:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks for your note

Thanks for your edits, especially the wiki help under the Astor Party... I'm still trying to learn all the wiki formating styles. My formatting might be lacking, but the information I want to share is accurate.--Nick —The preceding unsigned comment was added by N.M.Sheedy (talk • contribs) 18:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

Boyd, Oregon

I needed a break from government and politics, and noticed there was no article on Boyd, Oregon, so I did one. My great grandfather owned the general store and post office there, and my family still has a wheat ranch nearby. I resisted the temptation to interject personal knowledge and recollections, and relied solely on published sources. Anyway, I thought I remembered your having an interest in defunct towns, and thought you might like to look it over... you're such a great copy editor. Also, I tried to use the "city" infobox template, but it doesn't really work for ghost towns. I could use a generic infobox if you think that would set the map off better. The last several weeks have been rotten for photography -- nothing but overcast, which creates uncharacteristic shots. I'll take some photos to illustrate articles on local and area subjects as soon as we have some decent weather... may have to wait til spring. -- J-M Jgilhousen 23:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Great! (And thanks for the compliment!) How cool to have those kind of roots in Oregon. I'm a first generation Oregonian--every generation in my family moved a little more to the west. I'm glad they ended up here though. Boyd has been on my list for ages. In fact, I've got the redlinked names of all the Oregon communities I run across on my watchlist, so I almost always see new community articles the day they get written. I'm doing a data entry project for one of the state agencies involving 55-year-old data, and seeing all the names of the little towns I'd never heard of is what sparked my interest in Wikipedia. I would google the names and every time Wikipedia:U.S. cities without articles would come up and I said "Hmm. I smell a project." There must have been quite a few people from there at one point, because the name comes up a lot. It's funny it doesn't actually link to anything. (I'll go add it to Wasco County.) I don't even bother with infoboxes on the tiny little places because I think it ends up looking silly, but if other people put them on, I leave them be. I just wikignomed a couple things on the article, and when I get home, I'll see if OGN has anything new to add. Great job on the article--it's a lot longer than the ones I usually come up with. BTW, did you check out the article on the Great Southern Railroad someone added recently? Katr67 00:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I qualify for "pioneer family" membership in the Old Wasco County Pioneers Association on both sides of my family. My grandfather (son-in-law of the previously mentioned Boyd merchant) homesteaded on Fifteen Mile Creek, moving to town to provide a better education for his daughters. His uncle was a photographer, back when it was a young profession, and taught the trade to several relatives, so our Family Association has an incredible archive of photographs. I'll be uploading some of them. I'm afraid that when I was young, I harbored somewhat of an inferiority complex about my rural background, preventing my appreciation of what, in fact, is a rich heritage.

Regarding infoboxes, I'm fond of them, because I use Wikipedia quite a bit to grab quick bits of data, and I like having the basics summarized in "at a glance" form. You're right that on small articles it does unbalance the page, but I've been placing them anyway, hoping it would provide further incentive for people to expand both the articles and the infobox data. I'll think about that some more given your comment. Perhaps my use of them should be more judicious.

It hadn't occurred to me that someone would have gotten around to doing an article on the Great Southern. I've walked its roadbed often... it runs through our ranch. It was very important to Shaniko during its heyday, too. Thanks for pointing it out to me. I had no idea of the origin of the building to which the article refers, which does appear quite out of place in its current location at the base of Brewery Grade here in town. It now houses a couple of businesses, and I had a friend who lived in an apartment in its second story. I'll grab a snapshot of it for the article. This is great. -- J-M Jgilhousen 02:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Joel Palmer

Hi Katr67! Knowing your behavior, you have no doubt read Joel Palmer. As there are no revisions, it's probably the case you haven't got around to making any revisions or suggestions yet. (I have trouble believing there is nothing to find.) Alas, I found his Journal online after several days work resolving the various references. With the discovery of that incredible resource—which I spent hours and hours reading just to get to page 168 of 311—the article can be corrected and expanded greatly. It looks like most biographies condense the information to the point of being misleading. For example, while they were looking for a way over south Mount Hood, there was fairly regular stream of other parties coming and going, bringing provisions from The Dalles. Anyway, I invite you to comment/revise mercilessly to help guide the direction of the next round of revisions. — EncMstr 20:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I saw you wrote it, but believe or not, I haven't read it yet. (Trying to have a life outside Wikipedia, doncha know.) Thanks for the invite--I'll be sure to take a look at it tonight. (Or this afternoon if I come out of my post-office party food coma.) I'm glad my efforts are appreciated by most. I do tend to stick my fingers in all the Oregon pots. :) BTW, I ordered the book that lists all the people whose names are painted in the house and senate chambers at the Capitol--hopefully it will be a good resource. Katr67 21:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Mt. Hood

I am most pleased to run across an Oregon maven. :) I got lectured (indirectly) by an editor for writing something about glaciers "softening" in warm weather. I admit I don't know much about glaciers. I wonder if you know: It's clear why December climbing is risky, especially on the north slope. But why is it (or is it?) dangerous to climb during the late spring and summer. Apparently the glaciers don't "soften", so is it simply that the snows on top of the glaciers melt, and crevaces open up? Because the crevace on the hogsback is not visible in the winter, just in the warmer months. Thank you. :) Wahkeenah 02:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Wahkeenah. I may be an Oregon maven, but I don't know much about glaciers either. You might want to check in with User:EncMstr, since he's (I'm assuming he's a he, I've never asked) the one who took that part out. Better yet, find a source. I'd go look for one, but I'm busy catching up on a bunch of edits I promised I'd make. Cheers! Katr67 02:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm guessing my userID might ring a bell. :) I might have a book on Mt. Hood that goes into that subject more. I think that book also has a list of all the catastrophes on the mountain (as of 1991 or so), which would probably be overkill (pardon the metaphor) for the article. But it might be interesting to list the first fatality on the mountain, and maybe the one where someone got too close to the fumarole of this "dormant" volcano and suffocated. Like many mountains, Hood is both beautiful and sinister. That may be one reason mountains have often been likened to mythological gods. Wahkeenah 03:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Gladys

		The Original Gladys Holiday Greeting
		For your hard work, insighful opinions and overall contribution to Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow, I hereby award you this Thank You, along with my sincere hope that you have a wonderful holiday season. james.lebinski 18:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Otter Rock, Oregon

Hi Katr67; Otter Rock, Oregon could use some work; care to work your magic? Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Yup, I'm on it right now. :) Katr67 21:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Very nice. Thank you. Walter Siegmund (talk) 23:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Naming conventions -- State political offices and government agencies

Confession: The MoS and other policies and guidelines are so voluminous, I have to admit that I had not read the entire section on naming conventions, and have been relying solely on the "most popular name" provision when creating articles.

Recently, I had occasion to delve into it more thoroughly, and it seems that I may be running afoul of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (government departments and ministers) as I go through Oregon government and politics to fill in gaps, de-redlink, etc. In mitigation, I appear to be in good company, as I browsed through the correlary articles for California, Wisconsin, and a few other states before starting to name government-related articles, and they seem to be equally noncompliant with the guideline.

Since I expect to be creating a good number of articles in the next few months, I want to prevent the occasion arising where our noncompliant naming conventions becomes an issue requiring the renaming of a daunting inventory of articles. On the other hand, neither do I want to use a naming system that is so inconsistent with the ones which already exist within the scope of the Government and Politics subgroup.

The logical course would seem to be to rename the existing articles according to the guideline, and then follow it in the naming of future articles. Frankly, I am not keen on interrupting the research and writing I'm doing in order to undetake such a massive "clean up" project. Any thoughts? And should I move this discussion to the project, sub-group, or other talk page? -- "J-M" Jgilhousen 01:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be good to copy this discussion to the sub-group talk page, with a note on the main project talk page. My professional bias would be to name things according to what the state calls them, with redirects from what people might actually search for. I believe this automatically "pre-disambiguates" them as most of the state agencies have the word "Oregon" in them. Can you give some examples of articles you feel don't fit with the guideline? BTW, a quick rummage through my training materials from the legislature does not reveal an official list of state agencies and divisions but if there are any questions in this regard, I'm pretty qualified to figure them out. (See answer to ORS question, below.) Katr67 22:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Except for this line, done... and thanks. -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 22:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Inline citations

It appears that my liberal use of the ref tag to mark what content I have gotten from where is idiosyncratic, but everyone has been too polite to call me out on it. I understand that too many reference tags diminishes easy readability, but I am adding so much content right now, I don't know how else to keep track of what statements of fact I've gotten from where, and have already been bitten with a few Template:fact insertions, and other challenges as to sourcing. Care to provide some guidance? -- "J-M" Jgilhousen 01:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry to "spam" you by posting twice within minutes, but since they were on entirely different subjects, thought it best to separate them.

No worries. I just got done messing with the Peter French article and need a break, but I'll give both matters some thought and get back to you. Katr67 01:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. I haven't run into too much trouble in this regard, but my citation style is pretty random. I tend to go with whatever is prevailing on the page, though sometimes I stick embedded refs in as a stopgap, because frankly, using citation templates properly is a real pain during a quick and dirty wikignoming. I think I've also left the inline cites out and simply listed all my sources in a "References/External links" section. As I become more experienced, I tend to add more and more citation tags, though in the past I figured one citation at the end of a paragraph would suffice for the whole paragraph. Like you though, I've started using more than one source and blending the information, which necessitates the use of more tags in order to keep track of what comes from where. My most ridiculous amount of sourcing is in Neighb'rhood Childr'n, but nobody has read it, so no one has complained. :) (And in fact, I mixed templates with embedded refs, 'cos I was lazy.) I think using citation templates is a definite improvement in readability over embedded citations, though they do tend to make the readability in the editing box worse. If we are writing a real encyclopedia, and I think we are, then I think the emphasis should be on properly sourced information over readability (and I think Jimmy Wales would agree), because people naturally get used to ignoring footnotes if they so choose. If a person is not used to reading, say, professional journals or the like, the sourcing will seem annoying, but I doubt we should worry about it too much. I don't think there is going to be a solution that will please everybody--the minute you decide to not cite something that seems really obvious when you've cited everything else in a paragraph, I just bet someone will come along once in a while and slap a {{fact}} tag on it. On the other hand, the most ridiculous assertions sit unreferenced for months and nobody even questions them. Has anyone actually said anything to you about unreadability? I could see it if you cite every word, just like when people overlink things. But I haven't noticed that you overcite things.

Most of my edits have been creating articles from scratch, or doing a major expansion (usually from an existing stub of a paragraph or less). What brought the question up is that I have had people come through and remove all of my cite tags from where I had put them inline, and move them all to the reference section, where they had appeared with the reference/ tag already. I found it annoying, not because of a sense of ownership of the article, but because it effectively erased all track of which facts had been confirmed by which sources. And, no, nobody has mentioned readability to me, but it is mentioned as a consideration in the MoS, and my eyes aren't what they used to be, so I sometimes have trouble tracking lines that are packed with lots of blue superscripted brackets and numbers. And I hate the way line spacing is altered on lines with superscripts, which is as much an aesthetic sensitivity as an ocular problem. Like you, I have already settled into a pattern of holding my inline refs to the end of the paragraph, unless it's to document a source for a fact or quote that I think might be particularly open to challenge. That's about as far out on thin ice as I want to skate at this point, especially since so much of my work is in Government & Politics where cool heads tend not always to prevail. --"J-M" (Jgilhousen) 09:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

One final thought: In my college nature-writing class someone complained when I listed the Latin names of various critters in my paper after the common name, and I thought, well, if Barry Lopez can do it, why can't I? Of course, I'm no Barry Lopez, and I was writing for college students, not scientists, so I grumpily revised my draft and took out the offending Latin names. So when thinking about readability, consider your audience. For what level of reader are we writing Wikipedia? Katr67 23:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, since I'm enough of a dinosaur that I actually still pray in Latin, I think my obvious bias should prevent my commenting on the particulars of this anecdote, except to say that I appreciated reading it. I have no clue about our audience, and should think that it would vary radically according to content matter, as evidenced by the activity on the talk pages of, say, the Oregon High School articles as opposed to those on biographies of Oregon Pioneers. I would like to think the profile of readers of most of the articles I write would be a closer match to Britannica than World Book, but if I'm wrong, please don't disabuse me of that fantasy. It's a case of ignorance probably being bliss, and anyway, I intend to write as if it's true (or in as close a manner as I am able given my own educational and writing talent limitations). And of course we're contributing to a real encyclopedia, although I am sure there are many who would assert that my credibility with regard to reality is deeply undermined by my Faith... and so it goes. Thanks for acting as sounding board. It is of immense help. You probably noticed that I signed up for the adoption program, and in fact, became an adoptee. I tend to call upon you for precisely the advice I was seeking in that program. Lucky you, eh? -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 09:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

ORS 401.615 meaning

Hey, Katr, maybe you understand the gibberish the legislature spews out. If you wouldn't mind, would you look at this which seems to say a law was put into effect, and this (especially the note just before 401.610) which doesn't seem to include it, except for recognizing the former. Confusing, eh? What does it mean? — EncMstr 08:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Cool, a question I can answer! Either House Bill 3434 did not become law, or it has since been repealed. I would guess the former--if you look at the bracketed notes at the end of each statute, there are no changes that occurred in 1995. Give me a sec, and I'll see if I can find the tables for the 1995 session where one can figure this out. The note is confusing, but what it means is the legislation that enacted 401.605 to 401.635 did not include a section such as section 1 of HB3434 including those statues in the chapter. So the lawyers at the Legislative Counsel placed the new statutes in the the most logical chapter of ORS, but they are not actually *part* of the chapter. This is to make clear that the action of placing the statues there is editorial, not legislative. Yep, it's weird. Katr67 18:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, 1995 legislative history is here. It appears HB3434 passed, but maybe did not get added to the ORS chapter. Now going to look at Oregon Laws. Katr67 18:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Here is the bill as it was actually enrolled. No mention of adding it to ORS Chapter 401, so it resides in Oregon Laws 1995, which unfortunately is not online. The first 7 results of this search will show you all the amendments and such, if you're interested or masochistic. The bill you found was in its initial form, before being meddled with by both houses. It's the enrolled bill that matters, because bills are subject to being completely changed, including by the popular "gut and stuff", in which only the "relating to" clause stays the same. Anyway, for whatever reason, Oregon Laws 1995, Chapter 570 was not added to ORS. Katr67 18:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

It's probably just as well. I ran across some interesting materials arguing both sides of the issue—whether sufficiently "stupid" people needing rescue should pay. I've been looking for a place to put that, it seems a stretch in the Mount Hood, current incident article. Thanks for looking into that. At least I correctly got the flavor of it: that it is confusing. — EncMstr 05:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Trillium Lake

Is this a naturally-occurring pond? Or isn't that an earthen dam I see in the photo? Wahkeenah 23:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea and I couldn't find a reference to the fact that it was an artificial lake with a quick google--that's why I tagged it. Judging by the photo is original research. I just searched on "Trillium Lake" with "dam" and see that it is indeed a dam, so I guess it is an artificial lake. It would be good to find a source with some history about it. Katr67 23:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I strongly suspect Trillium is a natural lake, judging by its bottom (snorkel and scuba) and the lakeshores away from the dam. A forest service gravel road was built along the downstream side and that is probably the reason for a dam being built later to compensate for the damage to the lake the road builders inflicted. Gollie! That should be hard to find record for. I bet everyone involved wished it was forgotten. — EncMstr 05:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Oregon Railroad & Nav vs Oregon Ry & Nav

Thanks for creating the article and the OR&N one. I had assumed they were two names for the same thing, and since I got more google hits for Railway, I changed some of the references in articles from Railroad to Railway. Since you say you have the reference books, would you consider checking the "what links here" for the Railway article and make sure the references to the Railway are still accurate? Thanks for your help! Katr67 04:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rhallanger"

They are two distinct, yet related, railroads. Oregon Railway & Nav was the first, it started in 1879 and ran until 1896. It built a 643 mile that made up the core of the Oregon Railroad & Nav. Oregon Ry & Nav started out by buying two smaller railroads that ran along the OR side of the Columbia River and then connecting the two small lines with a full routs running adjacent to the river. The railway was a Subsidiary of the UP, at least since 1888 (when ICC started listing) and perhaps before that as well. Why did they change the name to Railroad in 1896. It was sold and reorganized (through still a UP Subs). What changed in 1896 that would bring about a name change. Here's what happened - typically railoads modified their name after a significant change or internal reorgnanization, sometimes it was a result of changing from Narrow-Gauge to Standard Gauge, other times it was due to the line being electrified.

Reorganization is what led to the name change from Railway to Railroad in 1896. The Railway had two non-operating subsidiary railroads (below). In 1896 the two non-operating subsidiaries and the Railway were sold (reorganized- still UP Subsidiary) as the Railroad. The reorganization brought the railway and the two subsidiaries under one railroad. 69 miles came from the Oregon Railway Extensions Co, a non-operating subsidiary of Oregon Railway & Nav - the railroad ran from Winon, WA - Seltice, WA and from La Grande - Elgin, OR. The other line that made up the "new" railroad was the 154 miles of the Washington & Idaho Railroad that extended the Railway into Idaho. It too was a non-operating subsidiary of the Railway and had two lines. One line ran from Tekoa-Rockford to Spokane (Falls) WA. The other line ran from Tekoa WA to St. Joe, ID and then Wallace ID with branches from there to Burke and Mullan. Rhallanger 05:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Oregon Government Stub Tag

Do I really, honest to God, have to go through the bureaucratic approval process before making and using Template:Oregon-gov-stub? I'm not sure there are yet 30 candidate articles, but there soon will be, and I'd rather be doing the researching and writing rather than assembling a list, posting it, and waiting, then going back through to replace the more generic tag, etc. "There are no rules" is seeming more and more like a fantasy by the moment. -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 06:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Heh. Yeah, I think you really do. I merrily created a stub category after seeing that someone had created an unauthorized stub for Oregon sports venues and found out after seeing it slapped with some sort of deletion tag that that was sort of a bad idea. Discussion here if you're interested. (Speaking strictly for myself, it's a kind of a stub categories for dummies primer.) It turned out OK, I learned some stuff, but yes, the stub sorters keep really good track of things. Though I cleaned up the mess I made, I also chose to ignore the fact that {{Oregon-bio-stub}} is kind of unorthodox because that one wasn't my fault and it seems to be pretty handy. Katr67 06:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I read the primer, which was precisely why I was hoping to avoid having to jump through all of its hoops. One of these days, I'd really kinda like to get back to writing. Once I discovered the MoS I started a downhill slope that is rapidly taking me into full-time administration work with no time left to actually compose anything. Hrrrumph. OK. I'll finish creating thirty stubs, then post the !@#$#@ing proposal. Sheesh. -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 09:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Tigard

Wow. I didn't know we even had an article on Bull Mountain. (That's why I didn't add the link.) -- llywrch 00:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep. That would be EngineerScotty's work. Katr67 00:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Natural history of Oregon

In reference to your statement of: 'this is for the Natural history of Oregon', a US State, of the USA on the North American Continent, in the "American West". I didn't learn what i (sic) learned because i think I am smart. Other people showed me things; however that does not mean they had all the answers. You have removed for a second time a piece of the "Natural history of Oregon", (and of Washington) if i understand where Celilo Falls are. (the American Black Vulture article has a subsection Labelled: "Fossil history, Oregon USA and specifics") So don't claim your way is right by denigrating, or denying that you are removing a Natural history reference. You can pretend you have moral authority. Or that you your (Aarrgh!) has some righteousness. It does not. (I've watched others say they are doing "One Thing", when it is clear they have a different agenda. The Wikipedians not only have stolen the word "Cabal", they are clearly at times creating their Cabals... (I hope somebody from Oregon, or the Pacific Northwest has the gumption to reverse some of your clearly, one minded intentions.)) -From the ArizDesert-SonoranDesert.. --Mmcannis 05:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I was merely replacing the intro, which your edits took out, that all categories should have, defining what the category is for. If an article belongs in a category, then it should be added to the category. I did so with Haystack Rock, but didn't add the other articles because I wasn't sure they quite fit, but I have changed my mind. Category pages aren't the place to add other commentary, however. This edit, with my "Argh" was me being mad at *myself* for messing up the bolding and having to make three edits in row. With this edit, you will see that I added Celilo Falls to the natural history category. This edit adds the vulture to Avifauna of Oregon, a subcat of natural history. That is the proper way to categorize things, If I understand Wikipedia guidelines correctly. There is no cabal. I have no agenda except for following Wikipedia guidelines and making the best encyclopedia possible. You would do well to assume good faith. If you can find a reference to a Wikipedia policy or guideline that says it's OK to add links to articles on the categorization page, rather than simply categorizing them, I'll be happy to read it. Thanks. Katr67 15:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, Thanks for the welcome message! I've been editing for the last 6 months or so -- this is a new username for me. I should set up my user page!ChartreuseLight 16:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Message to me re: naming conventions

I did not name the "Brisbane Light Plane Crash" article. It was already on Wikipedia as such, I just linked to it and included the name of the man who owned the company. Floracalifornia 15:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, Katr67, you're so helpful and reasonable! Unlike some uh, mods around here.  ;) Floracalifornia 17:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, some people are just trying to improve the encyclopedia, I wouldn't take it personally, and please assume good faith and try not to fight incivility with incivility. Katr67 19:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

AWB

You asked me to let yo know what I think of AWB. As you probably noticed, I finally got approved for its use last week. After staying up almost all night playing in the sandbox with it to get a feel for its features, I haven't actually used it much yet. It does what it is intended to do very well, and remarkably fast: semi-automating repetitive tasks. Today I turned it loose on the List of Governors of Oregon "what links here" list (one of several wiki lists it can read automatically, or it can work from a manually created txt file, or one entered directly into the program). With its "search and replace" function, it made short work of linking to the new Governor of Oregon article instead, stopping at each edit for confirmation (good thing, since some of the links really should point to the list). It would have been invaluable in our Mass tagging project, as it could have done it category by category in much less time than navigating to each article by hand. It will even use Wikisearch, but you know how functional that is. For a Wikignome par excelence like you, I think it is probably something you would want to consider having in your Wiki toolbox. Except, of course, it is another program to learn... I haven't begun to try all its features yet. -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 19:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I saw your flurry of activity, because naturally I have a bunch of those government articles on my watchlist. Actually I went ahead and signed up for it too, after I had to laboriously hand repair the ISBN on several articles in which I had referenced OGN, because Twisted86 accidentally got one number wrong and I was copying his citation. (Hmm, I forgot to give him an extra whomp with my foil last night for that...) I already managed to screw something up using it and had to go through and laboriously hand repair my mistake, but I can see how it will be very handy. I did a quick find and replace for a common spelling error, and it was so easy it warmed my little Wikignome heart. I don't mind doing things the old-fashioned way sometimes, but I'm sure there will many uses for AWB. If I need help figuring out what it does I'll be sure to ask you. I don't quite have the hang of the search parameters--when I searched for Oregon categories, only the top-level categories came up. And there are still many articles that need to be tagged, though I've got almost all the categories tagged except for the county ones and any that don't branch from the main Oregon cat. So if you know how to make it seach for untagged articles within categories, I'd love to know how to do that. Katr67 19:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't, and it relies on the internal Wikisearch function, which itself has problems. An inelegant but possible workaround would be to use one of the third-party search tools, convert the result to a text file, and have it work from that. But, there may be some way to do it with advanced search from within AWB. I'll tinker a bit, and see what I can figure out. I am still on the learning curve with it myself. -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 09:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar

It was kind of you to notice, and kinder to bother acting upon it. I set the list aside a few times to do other things for sanity sake, but found that its total disarray haunted me. --"J-M" (Jgilhousen) 07:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

In-bloody-credible!

That's all I can say. Volunteer work shouldn't be this frustrating.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2006/December‎; 23:43 . . Caerwine (Talk | contribs) (→{{US-state-gov-stub}} / Category:State government of the United States stubs)

-- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 09:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Hi Katr, I'm sort of confused with the current situation with regards to List of survivors of air disasters, List of sole survivors of air disasters, and Survivors of Air Disasters. Which page should be where, and is the history in the correct place? Thanks. —Mets501 (talk) 18:04, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

plants and animals

Editors pretty much do what they want and not much can be done about any of it. And some editors insist on repeating articles in both categories and their subcategories. Since there are so many WP rules, they can always cite a rule for whatever they want to do. I have not worked on Fauna/Flora for some time. There was much discussion that categories of Fauna/Flora by US State or by international country were not appropriate as animals and plants move/grow anywhere they want, disregarding human political boundaries. Since then, I have seen little work trying to settle what categories should be used instead/in addition to states/countries. Nor have I seen any biological-trained experts join any discussion. Sorry, I really do not know what I can do that would accomplish much. Hmains 19:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

wikirest

Hi Katr67! I hope you have a restful break. Please do come back. You are one of the heavy lifters around here and I truly appreciate having you around. Following in your footsteps, I almost always completely agree with your work. (The few differences are trivial matters of preference.) It is so rare—and so nice—to have someone who really knows how to write, as well as possessing a deep understanding of mechanical and spelling; "frosting" for the cake if you will. I looked around for something better than a barnstar, but decided on potentially over-the-top words instead. — EncMstr 01:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem!

(It was actually my first block, I'm a new admin.) If after the 48 hours is up he persists and I don't notice, please let me know. I will check though. That was a seriously large amount of spam... Dina 00:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Sisters, Oregon complaint

Trying to recorrect your corrections to the Sisters, OR page. You dumped most of my external links without creating new pages to hold them. Very annoying. It took some effort to track down those links. I am trying to get some of those links back online. bberryhill@gmail.com User:BBerryhill — Preceding unsigned comment added by BBerryhill (talk • contribs) 6:30, December 31, 2006 (UTC)

Mt.Hood

This is User:Furon. I am sorry about Mt. Hood, but I posted rumors, although this is now true. Sorry for the screw-up.

--Furon 02:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion?

Not sure if it was indeed a deleted image or not, but the University of Oregon academic seal is no longer showing on the University of Oregon page, nor any of the pages in its history. I believe it happened after someone updated the image code in the infobox, but I'm not sure. I've tried reverting that section of code back, but the image doesn't show up again.

I'm asking you since you seem to be very knowledgable in Wiki, do you know how to undelete the image or...something? Cluskillz 19:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey there, just wanted to let you know I got your message. Thanks for the compliment, but I'm not so knowledgable about images, but I'll take a look tomorrow and see what I can do. Sometimes it has to do with the image that is in the commons... Katr67 04:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi sorry this took me a while to get back to. It looks like the image was deleted, I checked the deletion log: "Image with unknown copyright status as of 29 December 2006". There's been a lot of this going around lately. *sigh* Seems like the UO seal would be fair-use. I try to steer clear of the copyright issues, so I don't know what using the seal would entail...plenty of other college articles have them, so it shouldn't be too hard to figure out... Katr67 00:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 3	15 January 2007	About the Signpost

Special: 2006 in Review, Part II	New arbitrators interviewed
Cascading protection feature added	WikiWorld comic: "Apples and Oranges"
News and notes: Fundraiser breaks $1,000,000, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with embedded external links?

You seem to have a no-tolerance policy, but I don't see the harm (in the absense of there being a Wikipedia article to link to) in giving readers a shortcut vs. having to copy-and-paste a phrase into a search engine to find more information, so long as what is linked to is appropriate given Wikipedia's policies and the overall effect isn't that of a link directory. (I'm thinking of recent edits you've made to Maplewood, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Oregon.) Could you explain your reasoning?--ScottMainwaring 18:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Scott, I've probably under the influence of WikiProject Spam--they're *really* hardcore. I have a pretty flexible policy, actually. But my rationale is that by wikilinking rather than embedded linking, hopefully someone will see that, for example, the rollerderby team needs an article. I think embedded links discourage this, and that putting the external link after the redlink just clutters the page, though it is a better solution. As for Maplewood, I doubt the church merits an article and I'm not real sure we want to encourage links to every organization that happens to be in a neighborhood. In fact, I'm not even sure a listing of churches is particularly encyclopedic, but I left that section there because I don't want to be accused of any bias. So that's my reasoning--feel free to put the links back if you want. And I'd like to thank you for keeping the Portland article tidy. Sometimes when I'm in a hurry and I see a dubious edit, I think, "Oh I bet ScottMainwaring will take care of it." :) Happy editing! P.S. We talked once about the communities categories--did you see that Hmains has spruced them all up? Katr67 00:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reason not to use footnotes to address this need? I know they don't work in every situation, but would something like [[Maplewood Church]]<ref>http://www.mwchurchsite.com</ref> work? -Pete 22:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd find it hard to quarrel with that. :) Katr67 22:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi, this is Martin1971 from Vienna, Austria. Thank you for your friendly welcome greetings and your spellcheck of the Sager orphans. Martin1971 17:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Yamhill County Post Offices

Actually, the Yamhill County Genealogical Society in McMinnville, Oregon.--Zinc2005 19:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

South Tabor

Thanks for the immediate attention to South Tabor! Always nice when a stub gets some love right away. -Pete 22:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. I have a lot of redlinks on my watchlist... Helpful or obsessive? You decide. ;) Katr67 22:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Interstate 82

Yeah, that was my mistake. I saw the edit and gave it a quick look, and at first it looked like cleanup to me (and part of it was). It wasn't until I checked a second time after you asked me about it that I saw the inappropriate blanking. I've done a major cleanup to the article, and restored some of the stuff the IP had blanked. Take a look at it now and tell me what you think. -- NORTH ^talk 23:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

likeresume

oooh, I like that tag. Glad to know it! Is there a similar one for "like campaign materials?" -Pete 21:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

If there isn't, there should be... Katr67 22:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Sal Esquivel

Hi- I'm confused by your recent edit of Oregon statewide elections, 2006. Are you sure that the 2006 election was the event that moved Esquivel from the Senate to the House, or did that possibly occur earlier? I originally created that page using data from the state's web site, so it seems unlikely that I would have gotten one legislator wrong, as I was working from an authoritative list. Also, Oregon House of Representatives lists Esquivel as a Rep for the 2005 session. Of course, the Elections page was my first major wikipedia project, and I'll be the first to confess that I did a terrible job listing citations... -Pete 21:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused too. :P I just reverted my changes. Yes, he was the rep for the 2005 session. I was looking through the list and using Google trying to figure out who the freshman senators and reps were. I ran across this page, which seems to indicate that he was neither an incumbent nor a challenger, but I remembered his name from the 2005 session, so I after a little digging (not enough, apparently) I went ahead and assumed that he had made the jump *after* winning the election, not before. I've said it before, but apparently the Oregonian copydesk needs more beatings. :) Katr67 22:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I think I just found our answer -Pete 22:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC):

In March of 2003, Sal was chosen to replace Senator Lenn Hannon to represent District 3, which includes the cities of Medford, Ashland, Phoenix, Talent, Jacksonville and part of the Applegate region. Shortly after his appointment, Representative Rob Patridge announced that he would not be running again for his State Representative position. Sal chose to run for the House seat of District 6 because he knows Medford so well after almost eight years on the City Council. He served out the nine months remaining in the Senate, garnering knowledge and experience to take to the House of Representatives.

Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 4	22 January 2007	About the Signpost

Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag	WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness"
News and notes: Talk page template, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Inza Wood Middle School

ANNOUNCEMENT:

This page is for a creative writing class, and we would prefer if you would not mess with it.

Thank You,

Ted —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Teddibear4774 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia is not here for you use for your creative writing. Katr67 22:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do not edit Inza Wood Middle School, as it was created for a class project and we will get our teacher to verify this. Email Boonec@wlwv.k12.or.us

We will add a note at the bottom that says that this is for a school project and not to be taken seriously. We will also add the real version under the fake part.

Thank You,

Teddibear4774 22:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion has been moved to the article's talk page. Katr67 22:46, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

User warnings have been updated

Hey there, take a look at WP:UTM. Looks like the old warnings are being deprecated in favour of some new ones. --Brad Beattie (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'm using the RC script, which automatically generates the warnings, so that will need to be updated, I guess. Katr67 18:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

months off

Clearly, you were having a look around and getting a feel for the place, to prepare for an all-out assault on sub-standard articles! A practice NOT to be discouraged in any way. By the way, I just about spat out my coffee when I saw your "nestled" google link. Priceless. -Pete 19:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Heh. I was actually able to let a "nestled" (a "cozily nestled" no less!) stand in the Salem, Oregon article for several days. I swear someone out there is testing me... And hey look, that Gopher Valley Oregon article even starts with the word. Must go stamp it out... Katr67 20:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ooops! Seems we collided attempting to remove that pesky nestling. I looked very quickly to see what you changed, but might have undid some of your work. Sorry for any confusion. I'll fix in a few hours if you're not doing anything with the article. —EncMstr 20:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Just saw your note, I'll "wip" away. Thanks! Katr67 20:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: "Official website"

I actually don't know of any set guideline on the topic; I've been relying on precedent. I guess my preference for the term is that a number of articles will link to popular fan sites for an individual without the title making it clear it is the official site for that individual. That and the fact it's so widely used already it might be better for consistency. But I really don't know. I've brought the matter up at Wikipedia talk:External links#"Official website"; hopefully it gets some attention. Owen 22:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Creativity

Hey, Katr,

I was wondering if it is possible to create a new template-thingy such as This user is a citizen of the U.S.A., only new. I also have no idea how to create a message box, like this one, so, if you wish, reply on my user discussion page! Thanks!--Furon 20:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Roseburg Senior High School

Hello Katr67, Thank you for showing your concern about the name of Roseburg's high school. The official name of Roseburg's High School is "Roseburg Senior High School." Otherwise it would be a misnomer. You can search the name "Roseburg Senior High School" for schools you will find a search result of "Roseburg Senior High School" such as http://www.schoolmatters.com