User talk:Acdixon/Archive Jan-Jun 2008

I deleted material because the Louisville Courier-Journal said that when Patrick Patterson won SEC Freshman of the Year in 2008 that he was the first Wildcat to do it. Also, There are no credited sources to when Adolph Rupp won National Coach of the Year or SEC Coach of the Year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.128.188.17 (talk) 22:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as you are a Wildcat fan and have edited other related Kentucky articles, you may be interested to know that University of Kentucky is being pushed for GA status. A detailed report has been produced and is available here, and I have taken care of some of the concerns. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 04:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested to see all the additions you're making to this article. I'm a descendant of Crittenden and he fascinates me. Monkeyzpop (talk) 18:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Kirwin book will stand you in very good stead. Mrs. Chapman Coleman's book is less accurate, I think, and more biased (she was family). I don't really know much beyond what I've picked up in these books and various articles. I visited Lt. John J. Crittenden's grave at the Custer Battlefield. There are pictures of him in various books on the Custer massacre. But then he's the grandson and not the subject of this article. Anyway, good luck and good work thus far. Monkeyzpop (talk) 18:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll change it to just the Breckinridge Family then because Clifton Rodes Breckinridge of Arkansas is also on there. - Ari Publican (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2008 (UTC)Ari Publican[reply]

The reason I kept the WP:BIO banner out of the box was because I believe it's very important for readers and editors to see the pink message about WP:BLP first and foremost. When it's in the box, it is less difficult to see for more ignorant readers. Something like WikiProject Kentucky is very important, but is not an official policy. I moved it to the collapsable box because the talk page was too cluttered with WikiProject boxes. Bash Kash (talk) 21:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I found it at Template:Blp. I'll go ahead and add it to the talk page. Thanks! Bash Kash (talk) 21:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is rare for me to actully know that my editing is appreciated, more Wikipedians should act like you. Thank you, Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 15:26, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Old Court-New Court controversy, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 06:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put this on Portal:Kentucky. already. If you have had any other DYKs that are Kentucky-related, let me know and I'll add them.--Bedford 08:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Acdixon, Nice to hear from you! I'd like to contribute to these articles though I am rather busy and can't spend as much time online. Let me know if there is something specific you'd like me to work on. I started the Noah Beauchamp article under an earlier name. Noah a distant cousin of Jereboam killed his neighbor some fifteen years after the Beauchamp-Sharp affair. Interestingly, both killed over the honor of a woman, both used a knife, both fled and were captured and both ultimately hanged. Dwain (talk) 17:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson, Julia Chinn and their two daughters are mentioned, and appear in person, intermittently in the first of these novels and constantly in the second. I'm not sure just what would be a practical means of citing this, since the books don't have indexes of character appearances. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I am going to do an article on early banking in Kentucky, and include Bank of the Commonwealth there. Found a lot of good stuff on that front.--Bedford 02:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates to endorse Portal:Kentucky as a featured portal.--Bedford 00:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should consider nominating the article on the Beauchamp-Sharp Tragedy for Did you know? - it'll show up on the main page and certainly give you credit for all the work you've done on this article! --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck getting that featured topic (and the GA and DYK, of course). Maybe I'll work on Scenes From 'Politian' and you can add that in to the topic. It's weak right now but I'll see if I can get it to GA. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Flag of Greenville Kentucky.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed a shame that Gwernol is acting in the manner of a self-righteous Wikipedian. As someone who is not only a credentialed member of the press but a Fantasy Basketball insider it is (or was as per you I am no longer allowed to edit this page) my intention to revamp this page to better inform and contribute to Fantasy Basketball players knowledge and enjoyment of the game including 1) sources that are and have historically been useful in informing Fantasy Basketball players (for which I have a list of external links to which I have a vested interest in none), 2) Varied league types, formats, guidelines, and settings (which I had originally in the article with no links but for some reason have over time also been deleted), and 3) Lists and Suggestions of "How To's", etc of running, joining, or playing in a Fantasy Basketball league (again with no external links in this area). However you would prefer that active as well as potential or interested Fantasy Basketball players (not Baseball mind you) not have access or be made aware this information. I have not edited any pages on the "Boer Wars" for example, as I am not knowledgable enough in the area to be qualified to do so, yet in this area where I am you feel that you have a better grasp of what is useful to Fantasy Basketball players without having that knowledge or understanding, including external links to DMOZ (who's links have become quite outdated as well a a number are no longer valid - how that is relevant or beneficial to anyone I have no idea) and an "advertising" link to NAB.com's Office Fantasy Games (not NBA the news source mind you). It was my understanding that part of Wiki's function or purpose was to "inform" and "educate", however I did not realize that had changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.72.220 (talk) 20:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a response to your response, I received a number of messages regarding the topic in my personal talk (under an IP) that aren't in that discussion. Please read my response, I think having some of that information beforehand may have change some of your answers. Overall however I do understand what you are saying, I just ask that you understand there has been more behind the scenes messages direct at me which have played a part in the contents of my responses. Thanks, FBF Commish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.72.220 (talk) 22:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. List of counties in Kentucky was one of the leading votegetters at WP:LOTD and will be list of the day twice this month. Let me know if you have any date preferences.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 02:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article is just a micro-smidgen below GA grade; you can see my comment here. Fantastic work! Kakofonous (talk) 22:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I passed the article. Kakofonous (talk) 22:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When you get a chance, would you mind adding a section to the longhunter article outlining their importance to the early settlement of Kentucky? I added the Tennessee section, but I don't know enough about the history of Kentucky to venture a Kentucky section, and the article is monstrously incomplete without substantial mention of Kentucky. Bms4880 (talk) 21:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Acdixon. I'm being nosy and commenting about your complaints of the FAC process on PMA's Talk page. Trust me - I get where you're coming from. I review FACs all the time, but to prove that I can take it as well as I can dish it, I nominated my own FA not long ago. As with your experience, I walked in thinking, "Nope, this article can't get any better." and sure enough, I got loads of feedback and went through many rounds of editing before the article finally passed. I got some generic comments like those you mentioned and some very specific ones, but in the end, the article is better. That's really the goal, isn't it?

Please don't get discouraged. Getting comments (even lots of comments) at FAC doesn't mean you are a bad writer. Just having an nomination there that doesn't tank within 24 hours means you are a fantastic writer. I write for a living, and I can tell you that every day there are glaring errors in my writing that I can't see because... it's my writing. No parent thinks their baby is ugly. :) --Laser brain (talk) 19:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no apology needed. I didn't take it personally - just like I hope nominators don't take my comments personally. I only meant to say, good work, carry on smartly, and I'll be looking for your next FA. --Laser brain (talk) 14:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lack of sources on Sharp won't hold that one back. I'll reply with a specific suggestion on the talk page there in a minute. Keep working on RMJ, he's worthy of the work. Like I said on the FAC page, you have the same problem I do, wordiness. Why use just one word when 12 will do?? (grins). If you like, I can give it another run after you finish with the huge list of problems. I hesitated to drop that on the page, but like you, I like specifics, not generalizations. Hopefully it didn't discourage you too much. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And here I was hoping you'd remind me about what the heck was involved in the Bank controversy. (And while you're at it... the great Silver vs. Gold debate...) Ah, well. I'll go look at SPS shortly, as I wake up. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Metcalfe (US politician), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 14:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a couple of points - your submission was actually a little late since you started the expansion on April 3. The five day eligibility period starts from the time you start the article or expansion, so next time I suggest you prepare the article in your sandbox first.

Also, this article already had a DYK and consensus seems to be that an article is not eligible for more than one. Since I didn't notice the existing DYK before I promoted your expansion, I've overlooked it this time, but next time please don't submit an article that has already been DYK'ed. Thanks, and congrats on the DYK, Gatoclass (talk) 14:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay, if I'd noticed earlier I'd have disqualified it, but since I didn't you got an extra one :)

You obviously did a lot of work to expand it anyhow, so it's not as if it wasn't deserved. Cheers, Gatoclass (talk) 13:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing if its possible to get Confederate government of Kentucky as the featured article for June 3rd. It's the 200th anniversary of Jefferson Davis' birthday, which happened in Kentucky, and is Confederate Memorial Day for Kentucky and other states.--Bedford ^Pray 00:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]