User talk:25or6to4

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

The counts for LaSalle County and Lake County in File:NRHP Illinois Map.svg seem to be swapped. I'd fix them myself, except it looks like the densities were calculated from the swapped counts, and I'm not sure how to fix those. Would you mind fixing them? TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 15:10, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Got your email; hope you don't mind discussing it here. I'm not exactly sure what you have in mind for the new map. Are you imagining basically the inverse of the percent illustrated map, except percent un-illustrated? Because I don't really think that would be necessary---just look at the blue areas on the illustrated map instead of the red areas (indeed I think that's kind of what everyone does already).

If not, I assume you mean a map based on the actual number remaining in each county, which might highlight some small counties that have only, say, 4 listings, and 3 of them have been illustrated, so it shows up as 75% illustrated, which seems like more work than it is. If we created a map with something like a color for only one image remaining, a color for less than five, less than ten, etc., this small county would be brought out of obscurity and it would be easier to recognize that it was closer to being fully illustrated than some large county which is 90% illustrated but has 200 listings, so requires 20 more to get to 100%.

Even for that small benefit, I just don't really see the need for that kind of map. At most I think like a list dumped somewhere by the bot that listed the counties in order of how many images are outstanding would be useful. This could be like a "nearly fully illustrated list" or something, and could be linked from our project to-do list. I'm not sure the map form would help anything, especially if it's only run once. There's just too much overlap with the illustrated map in my opinion. What do you think?--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the second part was what I was thinking, highlighting the counties with many available targets in a small area. Was more just curious as to what that would look like. No worries. Thanks!25or6to4 (talk) 12:49, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. You were actually thinking of using it opposite of me haha. I would be looking for counties with only 1 or 2 images left that might be easy to get up to 100%. You would be looking for counties with a lot of images left so you could go on a photography spree. Maybe I can produce a list sorted both ways; I'll work on it when I get some time. I still think a new map would be overkill, though; just look at the blue parts of the illustrated map.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 20:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am drafting Draft:List of county courthouses in Texas and, when using DabSolver about the Cameron County Courthouse entry there, I discover you have a draft for a List of county courthouses in Texas (at User:25or6to4/sandbox?). Hey, could you please move yours into mainspace, and allow me to add stuff there if I have additional material? I'd rather not duplicate stuff you have done and I would rather not push my new version into place, usurping your incoming work.

By the way, I am working on larger Draft:List of county courthouses in the United States Draft:List of courthouses in the United States, standardized pretty much on format of the already-existing List of county courthouses in Alabama. Yours is in somewhat different format but that's okay.

cheers, --doncram 22:43, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I moved the list over to the main page you listed. What the article could use is a color scale legend, but I'm not sure how those are built. 25or6to4 (talk) 04:46, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I thought your list was more complete, that it would have all the NRHP-listed ones which are in my draft. Interesting that you have 3 or 4 types apparently. Some version of color-coding like yours might go into the main list.

How about adapt one of these keys and put it at the top?

KEY

One type

Two type

Yet another

Key 2

Fourth type	Fourth type
	Fifth type
Sixth type

Thanks, --doncram 06:45, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, are you aware of Draft:List of county courthouses in Texas. Not sure why it is still in draft space, but why not improve on the draft, and move it to mainspace instead of creating a new article from whole cloth.– Gilliam (talk) 06:27, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey that one in Draftspace was started by me, before i saw 25or6to4's draft in their userspace. I deferred to that one going to mainspace instead. Hmm. Not sure if has historic merit to keep at all. For sake of cleaning up Draftspace, i will move that to User:Doncram/List of county courthouses in Texas and will consider deleting even that, later. --Doncram (talk) 19:21, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of county courthouses in Texas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Caldwell County Courthouse. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

National Register of Historic Places listings in Center City, Philadelphia

added a link pointing to Center City

National Register of Historic Places listings in Passaic County, New Jersey

added a link pointing to Mountain View, New Jersey

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:25, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you tell me your source for this edit? I have been unable to verify it using the sources available to me. Thanks. — Ipoellet (talk) 23:01, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This list is the one I was using. 25or6to4 (talk) 12:09, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! — Ipoellet (talk) 19:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

... for your many contributions to articles about historic buildings. Keep up the great work! :) ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:25, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a chance that you could modify the NR-by-county map by removing Bedford entirely? Your map shows Bedford as having 0 listings, but the reason that there's no Bedford city list is that the city recently downgraded to a town (see List of cities in Virginia for why this is relevant), so its listings are part of the Bedford County list, and it shouldn't appear on the map at all. Nyttend (talk) 16:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I remember having some difficulty with that one when I last updated the maps. This explains why. I have updated the map to remove the Bedford borders and number, and centered the 31 for the county. 25or6to4 (talk) 16:39, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason to say that the place has been removed from the National Register. DHR's lists are primarily those of the Virginia Landmarks Register; they omit NR-listed places that aren't on the VLR, and they include VLR-designated places that aren't on the NR. You'll note that the delistings page even includs sites such as [1] that never got listed on the NR in the first place. Finally, having spent an inordinate amount of time to get there, I can testify that the Whitewood High School was removed from the NR just this fall, well after it got moved to the Delisted page as far as the Virginia DHR cares. Treating it like any other destroyed site is what I'd suggest doing. Nyttend (talk) 15:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 on 01:03, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, do you know if you could update this map? You deleted the city of Bedford back in October, but aside from that, it's not been updated in a bit over a year. Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 00:19, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyttend, I am in the process of updating all the maps, but it is a labor-intensive process. 25or6to4 (talk) 21:37, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Finally found the original one. Apparently went from SH 121 & US 75 north of McKinney to new US 75. Now part of SH 121.Alexlatham96 (talk) 01:44, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating the NRHP lists with new listings. Can you please make sure you use the correct refnums when you add them? Thanks! Magic♪piano 11:56, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the 2016 photo you took for Daigle House, in National Register of Historic Places listings in Lafayette Parish, Louisiana, appears not to be the correct building. The photo in the Louisiana data system, at https://www.crt.state.la.us/dataprojects/hp/nhl/view.asp?ID=376, shows a different building. I noted discrepancy at Commons photo page https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Daigle_House,_Lafayette,_LA.jpg and will move the photo from the article to Talk:Daigle House for discussion.

I imagine it is quite possible that the house at 1022 South Washington Street is not the Daigle House, that there is an error in the Louisiana data system (copied by NRIS). The Louisiana text file (at https://www.crt.state.la.us/dataprojects/hp/nhl/attachments/Parish28/Scans/28002001.pdf) does not give a street address. Hopefully the Daigle House still exists nearby, and/or hopefully you got a pic of it on your trip to the area. Could you possibly please check, and perhaps comment at Talk:Daigle House and perhaps edit at the Commons page? There is some simple way to request a photo be renamed at Commons, if you agree the photo is not of the Daigle House. --doncram 16:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the house was moved, or at least its address changed, to 1021-B. You didn't happen to have a pic of the house in the background, from another angle, by any chance? :) Anyhow, keep up the good work with your photo contributions. I will plug along and develop more Louisiana articles. cheers, --doncram 00:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I remember having trouble identifying this site before I left for my trip. Unfortunately, I seem to have guessed wrong. Doing a further examination, I think the Louisiana data system AND the Downtown Lafayette web site both have the wrong address. Looking at the map and aerial imagery, it should be the building at 1012 South Washington. That building matches the Louisiana state site, and business at that site matches what the Downtown Lafayette web site describes as a real estate company. No such luck on nearby pictures catching the building. Now the problem is figuring out what to rename the file to...25or6to4 (talk)

Thanks for showing interest in the lists!

It appears that the original list was created from a spreadsheet possessed by User:VinceLeibowitz who began that list. That original list included all counties in a single page that was definitely WP:TOOLONG. I had trouble editing that original list as my low-resource laptop would rebel and threaten to shut down if I did more than short edits at a time without leaving time for my processor to cool off. For that reason, I saw the need to split it up into separate pages.

I do not have a copy of Vince's spreadsheet, but it seems to be out of date anyhow. It certainly does not entirely conform with the THC atlas. Before beginning the list split, I had already audited >40% of the state's counties with the THC atlas including providing marker numbers with links, coordinates, street addresses, and Wikilinking towns whenever possible and incorporating those corrections into the original list. This audit also covered NRHP county lists and articles to fix any glaring problems in those.

The list split has basically been a copy/past job from the original page, replacing the county column with linkable county section headers, adding an images column, and adding images to sites in those counties I've already audited. This process has also provided me with a chance to give a second look at those counties I already audited to fix anything I missed the first time. The rationale I used in creating the page splits has been to keep individual site entries per page under 500 with some room for future expansion while keeping the entries per page roughly similar. These divisions are based upon the number of RTHLs in each county according to the online THC atlas and not according to existing entries from Vince's work.

I'm ignoring images for sites in counties I haven't audited in the interest in finishing the list split in a timely fashion. Once this is finished, I'll then resume my audit. Part of my process of adding images includes finding all relevant images in Commons and making sure they are appropriately categorized, so this can be quite a chore.

The counties that have already been audited can be instantly recognized as having sites colored according to the table legend, having all marker numbers linked to each site's THC atlas page, almost always having coordinates, and having cities and towns Wikilinked. The audit began in the state's far west, and has increased eastward incrementally. All of the completed counties are west of US 281 (Wichita Falls to RGV via San Antonio). Getting the audit above 50% would include all such counties and a handful along the highway itself.

As far as progress so far, I posted the last split-off article last night. I just need to create links from county articles and county NRHP lists to the new page and deal with images. Then, I can finally reformat the original, whittled-down list page for conformity.

As far as your offer of help for these new lists, what I would really appreciate is for you to review them stylistically compared to other similar lists on Wikipedia. I provided navigational boxes at the top and bottom for each page, but I don't know if that could be improved upon. These are hard-coded on the pages rather than relying on a separate template. Perhaps the page leads could be stronger and more detailed, and maybe more cross-linking with other general articles about the state's historic sites. Make changes as you please or let me know if you have any suggestions. Fortguy (talk) 02:49, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 25or6to4, Texas & Pacific Steam Locomotive No. 610 is not listed in Anderson County but in Tarrant County (see). -- Hans Koberger (talk) 21:17, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the original listing was when TP610 was located in Tarrant County. But since it has been permanently relocated to Palestine, we keep all listing in the county they are currently located. That's how the lists are kept here at Wikipedia. Thanks for the interest! 25or6to4 (talk) 21:37, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the information :-) -- Hans Koberger (talk) 21:55, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't there be a "formerly listed" item about it at the original listing county list? In a separate section below the current listings. When I covered ships which moved, that's what i did. Especially because there are sources out there (e.g. private website nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com, though i didn't check it) which probably appear to be reliable sources that it is located in Anderson county. There are lots of county list-article examples of this. --Doncram (talk) 14:10, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Your survey Link: https://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_8oASXnTr4fkRMI5&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 12:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson County Monument, listed on the National Register on April 19, 2018. Photographed on April 19, 2018, per your Commons photo caption. How did you do that? :) --Doncram (talk) 14:20, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. I keep an eye on the pending listings around Texas, so I knew that it was coming. Just happened to pass through there on the exact day! 25or6to4 (talk) 14:42, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The title here is exactly what I used for the talk page for each picture file. I noticed two maps of Bandera County, Texas are labelled as Austin County, Texas. Please view the picture file talk pages for Bandera, Texas and Lakehills, Texas on wikipedia. NewYorkeruser (talk) 22:28, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I wonder if you would be interested in helping reorganize the Texas NRHP list-articles. I think that the current system consisting of a state-wide list-article and linked separate list-articles for counties, one for each county having any NRHP listings, doesn't serve as well as it should. It is virtually impossible to figure out what counties are near each other in any area, say in the Plains region, and to see the NRHPs on a linked "Map of all coordinates". I currently think it would be better to organize by 10 regions defined by Texas Historical Commission as in this map. Please see User:Doncram/National Register of Historic Places listings in Texas (A), my current draft which includes the state-wide list-table, with regions identified for each county. In which the links for all the Plains-area counties go to their single-county tables within a regional list-article, User:Doncram/National Register of Historic Places listings in the Texas Plains Region, which works better. You can click on "Map of all coordinates" and see all the NRHPs in the 52 counties that make up the region. There would be 10 such regional groupings, holding all the smaller counties and splitting out to individual pages only the too-large counties.

There's some discussion at wt:NRHP#Texas Panhandle merger of county list-articles which is bogged down and might not get to any consensus. I would like to work up a very clean proposal, separately, and come back with something ready for an RFC involving more editors.

I wonder, could you possibly please make a map of the 10 regions, i.e. showing region boundaries and labels, with county outlines? I think without the numbers of NRHPs, if you could only make one, but perhaps another version with those numbers which could be helpful in informing debate. A complication for map preparation is that there are 6 counties which are in fact split across regions (the two regions are identified for each, in the list-table). A draft map could simplify by putting those counties into the region that is first alphabetically for each one. Or likely the apparent dividing line within each of those could be discerned from careful comparison of THC's map vs. any map showing all the county outlines.

I don't know where you would stand on such an idea. There seems to be some antipathy towards any change at all. Could you possibly help? Anyhow, either way, thank you for your contributions with NRHP maps as at the right here. Cheers, --Doncram (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the inquiry on a map. Unfortunately, I'm on extended paternity leave, and have no access to any of my map-making software. 25or6to4 (talk) 02:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i am back, this time to apologize and to thank you. The apology is this: i am sorry for going off on a bit of a tirade at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Texas Panhandle merger of county list-articles recently, in which I named and partly blamed you for what I perceived to be happening there. Obviously, i got frustrated. I thought what I wrote would be okay because I was obviously blasting away at the entire world, sort of, and perhaps it would be understood as funny even, but maybe that was not the case, and I do think I was wrong to possibly offend you. And this was after I asked here for your participation, too. I do appreciate that you considered my request here, and that you followed the link to the wt:NRHP discussion and offered your information and opinions there. About your pointing to the Wiki loves Monuments map, I thought that was interesting, but as an excellent covering-all-listings example, rather than showing artificially selective coverage like the list-of-only-small-counties approach does, but maybe I misunderstood. Anyhow, I do appreciate your thoughtful perspective and info offered.

Perhaps I should acknowledge that sorting out what to do with Texas is not terribly easy. I mentioned at User:Fortguy's Talk page that I saw part of the Ted Cruz - Beto O'rourke debate, in which Beto mentioned, claimed credit for, having visited all 254 counties; my main reaction was too bad he didn't know about the 10 THC regions he could have just visited them and saved a lot of time, or maybe not, oh well. :) I do think that the current situation is bad, and I hope that a better solution for Texas NRHP and RTHL coverage, using some scheme of regions, is possible sometime in the future, but I have to acknowledge that of course it will be better if diverse views are heard and that some kind of compromise can emerge. For now, anyhow, I expect to go forward on trying to adopt regions in a different, easier, state, West Virginia, next, instead, stay tuned!

Again, anyhow, thanks and sorry. :) --Doncram (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm wondering if Puerto Rico could be included in your map.

If it's not then where would it be? As is often the case, Puerto Rico is not in the countries database and it's also not in the US database, so ends up not found anywhere. In the case of NRHP, Puerto Rico does show up on their database. I hope then that P.R. can also be shown on the map. Thanks.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 01:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 25or6to4,

Your script User:25or6to4/NRHPmapTX.js is no longer functional because it attempts to get an editToken from mw.user.tokens. The script should instead get a csrfToken. editTokens were removed from mw.user.tokens on October 3, 2019 at Phabricator during this edit as they were redundant to csrfTokens.– BrandonXLF (talk) 00:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Kappa Cygnids (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cygnus

Sigma Hydrids (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hydra

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see you do a lot of stuff on NRHP. A while ago someone put a message on my talk page soliciting people to create articles on NRHP places. Do you know who that was? Jim Evans (talk) 19:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...for all the wonderful Image additions @ List of United States post office murals. ―Buster7 ☎ 14:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dalton House (Dalton, Pennsylvania), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Times-Tribune.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

25or6to4 has been constantly editing in some capacity since 2006 and has a superb track record of always being civil, polite and helpful while editing articles on comets and courthouses and counties among other interests. 85% of his efforts are to mainspace. A member of Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads and Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, it is not surprising that the United States National Register of Historic Places listings and assorted Texas state highway articles are some of his favorites.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

A Road Fan

25or6to4

Editor of the Week for the week beginning September 11, 2022

Editing in some capacity since 2006 while compiling a superb track record of being civil, polite and helpful. Articles on comets and courthouses and counties among other interests. 85% majority of his efforts are to mainspace. A member of Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads and Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places

Recognized for

assorted Texas state highway articles

Notable work

United States National Register of Historic Places listings

Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 14:54, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Buster7 and all the EOTW team: Thank you so much for this honor. I truly appreciate it. I, unfortunately, was on vacation that entire week, so I didn't see it until I came back, but it was a nice, restful week! Thanks again! 25or6to4 (talk) 04:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.

Happy Holidays. ―Buster7 ☎ 07:35, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, 25or6to4, I am, as always, a fan of your maps of NRHP listings per 100 square miles which adorn the NRHP list-articles for the 53 or so US state and territories. (BTW, somewhere above I saw suggestion that those should include an "as of" date, which offhand sounds good to me, although an editor can always go and look up when a given image was created.)

I wonder, could you possibly create a reference map of Texas, showing its 12 regions as defined by the Texas state Comptroller in 2022 here (requires scrolling down slightly). I am wanting to include that into the List of RHPs in TX page along with a revised table of the 254 counties' tallies, in draft form at Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Texas/ByEconDevArea. It adds a sortable column identifying the region for each county, and then a reader/editor can go to the region page and review a manageable portion of the state. See especially how nicely the "Map all coordinates using OpenSourceMap" link works now for each of the draft region pages (e.g. this link goes to OSM map for all of the Capital region except for Travis County. What i'd like is a simple 12-colored map with the appropriate counties colored. There is no ordering of regions, so random attractive colors would be great. The map should be relatively stable, although the Comptroller's reporting changed from a 13-region version in 2020 to the current 12-region version for 2022.

FYI i have posted about this pending change for the Texas page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Texas regions.

I would be thrilled if you could take on this task. Either way, I remain your fan. :) cheers, --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:21, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Funny, now I see #Texas regions map discussion section from 2018, above, still. I couldn't obtain any consensus about reorganizing the Texas material back then, and dropped it. Now, what's different is that I am using wp:Transclusion in making region lists such as this region list for High Plains (Panhandle). These transclude in live copies of the tables from the 254 separate county lists, and nothing changes at all for editors. Only the same separate county lists are ever to be edited. The reader, though, now gets an additional option of viewing a given county's table on a region page, where they can see how it relates to tables/locations of adjacent counties. I believe this avoids/resolves all objections to my 2018 proposal (which was to actually merge the individual county articles onto region pages). --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:32, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doncram, File:Texas Economic Regions 2022.svg for a first try. I tried to separate the colors best I could. The file peaked above 37M, so it's a big file. I can jpeg or png instead to get the size down if that would work better. If anything, transcluding the counties did help find two latlons that were way off, which have been fixed. 25or6to4 (talk) 03:47, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making the map-graphic and for fixing the two latitude-longitude locations. You will have seen that National Register of Historic Places listings in Texas now includes the region map, as well as the map of counts by county.

I was coming here to ask if you could add an "as of" date to the map of counts (i.e. display that directly in the graphic for readers to see), because I was going to count up the numbers in each region on that, and put those into new 12-row table (incomplete) by region of the numbers of counties (done) and tallies of NRHPs by region (left blank for now). I am thinking the numbers by region wouldn't have to be updated, except rarely (when the map of counts is updated by you), and that would be okay because it would be stated clearly that the tallies given are as of the date the map of counts was updated.

But, just now, it occurs to me that it would be maybe wonderful if you could _combine_ the two graphics, i.e. do your counts thing but in the 12-color region map. Would that be possible? I guess it would require shadings in each of the 12 hues. Possibly/likely more than you want to take on, but I would sure be interested in seeing that. And just having one Texas map in the list-article.

Either way, I'd like for the "as of" date to appear, so that the text explaining the 12-row table can be very clear that the numbers there are for that date.

Whatever you feel like doing would be great. By the way I am imagining that the List of RHPs in WV could be presented by 8 regions that the state uses, and have previously been discussed somewhat (at Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in West Virginia). And also the List of RHPs in ND could be presented by just three regions that I previously found, and I suggested that at Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in North Dakota#Regions (although there were no comments by anyone else). With the transclusion approach meaning that nothing changes for editing, I am thinking these could go through and make a better experience for readers and editors in these states. Thanks again for all your help! --Doncram (talk,contribs) 04:54, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's minor. In the chart on the left, it goes from 4.0-8.0, then 80.0-16.0. Could that extra 0 be deleted, please?

Thanks so much for all the work you do! :) --Ebyabe (talk) 17:31, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I, uh, meant to do that! Fixed. 25or6to4 (talk) 17:49, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Attached KML/Oregon Route 127 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Attached KML/Oregon Route 202 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:21, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi 1979 → on 19:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Attached KML/U.S. Route 377 in Oklahoma has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:18, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should you try to do some more? 25 or 6 to 4... love that song :)

theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:25, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]