User talk:Bkonrad
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.
| 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
/Archive1 February-March |
/Archive6 January-February |
/Archive12 January-February |
/Archive18 January-February |
Contents |
[edit] Editing of Post Toasties from Post Cereals Page
Bkonrad, I noticed that you have moved Post Toasties from the Discontinued Cereals column back up to the Current column. The reason you gave was that it still shows on the Post website in their cereals section. As you know many websites show products that are no longer made but may still be in circulation - this happens to be one of those circumstances.
I am an unfortunate expert of Post Toasties since I have been eating this cereal almost every morning for over 30 years. On the last week of Jan 2007 after I could no longer find Toasties in stock at my local store - I sent an email to the Kraft customer service to see if there was a production problem. I received an email response from them stating that the cereal had been pulled from production but gave no effective date other than that it would no longer be available. I followed up with a call to the Kraft consumer help line (1-800-323-0768) to verify the information I had received in the email. Much to my disappointment it was correct and the customer service agent gave me further information that was not included in the email - production had actually stopped in April of 2006 (taking almost 9 months before running out at the stores).
I have gone ahead and placed it back in the discontinued section and would ask before you move it back again to the Current column - please don't take my word for it or the Post website - call the phone number and you can then hear for yourself. I have sent an email to Kraft asking when the site will reflect that the cereal is no longer available - I have not received a response yet. Two different replies from Post/Kraft stating the same thing should be enough to pass the test. --Dleigh32 00:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, what you need to do is provide a verifiable source. Your word that someone else said something to you is not sufficient. If there is no public announcement, it is in effect unverifiable until such time as there is such an announcement. older ≠ wiser 01:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] La Pointe, WI
La Pointe, WI, is not unincorporated. There is a town council, they tax, have a road department, a budget atc.
The township of La Pointe (which is a survey distinction, and contains some of the other apostle islands) is distinct from the political subdivision of the Town of La Pointe on Madeline Isaland. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.88.177.98 (talk • contribs). 17:11, March 9, 2007 (UTC)
- Um, OK. And the reason you're pointing this out to me is....? FWIW, the administrative authority of the Town of La Pointe extends over the entire township (apart from what might be under park jurisdiction). The community named "La Pointe" on Madeline Island is not the same as the administrative authority of the Town government (although the township offices may indeed be located in the community). And Towns in Wisconsin are a separate class of government from incorporated municipalities like villages and cities. older ≠ wiser 22:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 'North America (Americas)' ... again
Thank you for weighing in on this prior AfD. Even though an apparent consensus supported the prior AfD in some way, and the article has been deleted, this has reared its head again -- please peruse and weigh in. Thanks! Corticopia 22:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Phoenix
Hey, just wanted to let you know that I didn't mean to tread on your toes. Good to know that right is correct for disambiguation pages. Sorry. ...adam... 18:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Anishinaabemowin language Userbox
Aaniin, with great effort from User:Miskwito, we now have the oj series of Anishinaabemowin language userboxes. On the WP:IPNA/Nish page, we have a matrix of the possible categories for the oj series and the major dialect groupings. You can now add to your Userpage one of the oj userboxes that are available or you can help create a userbox for the dialect of your interest. Please see Wikipedia_talk:Babel#Ojibwe_language_userboxes for the full discussion. Miigwech. CJLippert 23:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Michigan Reps
No more dead links at United States Congressional Delegations from Michigan
I revised the chart at the Michigan Territory's At-large congressional district page again I don’t believe Wing was a Whig until afterwards. We seem to be changing this back and forth. I hope it is better now. Jjmillerhistorian 02:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- That's great. Good work. older ≠ wiser 02:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] John S. Barry
I'm having trouble connecting infoboxes here. I've tried other examples, but I can't find one which helps. I was wondering if you could help. It looks sloppy right now. Jjmillerhistorian 17:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, it looks OK to me. What's the problem? older ≠ wiser 00:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- It's mainly the connection of the boxes. If I connect them together the Lieutenant Governor from his second time in office moves up to his first time. Now the first box shows the word born at the end. Any other dual infoboxes seems to combine without a problem. Like Grover Cleveland and George Romney. Jjmillerhistorian 11:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I see -- I was looking at the succession boxes at the bottom. I don't know much about infoboxes. Looking at Template:Infobox Governor, there are fields available for
- It's mainly the connection of the boxes. If I connect them together the Lieutenant Governor from his second time in office moves up to his first time. Now the first box shows the word born at the end. Any other dual infoboxes seems to combine without a problem. Like Grover Cleveland and George Romney. Jjmillerhistorian 11:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
| order2= | term_start2= | term_end2= | predecessor2= | successor2=
-
-
- So I think think that both terms would actually be entered using the same info box. older ≠ wiser 22:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Thanks, the template helped, here are the fields for a Governor's two non consecutive terms...
-
-
| order4 = | office4 = | term_start4 = | term_end4 = | lieutenant2 = | predecessor4 = | successor4 =
-
-
-
-
- It worked out just right! Jjmillerhistorian 11:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Michigan Supreme Court Historical Society
Thanks for the lecture, I usually try to avoid as much of that as I can. I think that is the first time I used information from that site and the political graveyard had much less info. There is usually something one source has where the other one doesn't. I will try to be more cautious next time. Jjmillerhistorian 17:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Franklin Township question
I reduced the Franklin Township article to links to more disambiguation pages because it is far more succint, since there are so many Franklin Townships. It seems to me that if we can't link from one disambiguation page to another, "Franklin" will have to list all the Franklin Townships, and we'll have no need for a Franklin Township page at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nyttend (talk • contribs) 17:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC).
- Moreover, the Washington Township page has linked to the "Washington Township, ___" articles with the number of townships for over two years. Nyttend 18:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Franklin and Franklin Township are different terms. On a small disambiguation page, it would make little difference to include "term Township" along with "term". With a common term like Franklin, it makes sense to separate Franklin Township. But it seems senseless to force a reader to unnecessarily go through two disambiguation pages. older ≠ wiser 20:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
