User talk:Larry V

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Larry V is probably doing problem sets right now. If not, he will be soon enough.

Archives Archive 1: September 2004 – August 2006

Contents 1 Long-Overdue RfA Thanks from Alphachimp 2 Re:Michael Hertz Associates 3 MORE Subway Changes 4 The return of User: Samstayton 5 WP:NYCS 6 Protect your userpage. 7 Subway table 8 Massachusetts 9 0.999... != 1 10 Bowling Green (IRT Lexington Avenue Line) 11 Aaron Gray 12 User Page 13 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thames Valley College (London, Ontario, Canada) 14 Thames Valley College (London, Ontario, Canada) on deletion review 15 Michel Bauwens 16 Minor edits 17 Subway table 18 goethean and me 19 42nd Street-Fifth Avenue-Bryant Park 20 Major reorganization at WP:NYCS 21 Question 22 The Three Great Powers on deletion review 23 En dashes 24 how to delete 25 smear campaign 26 IRC 27 Seventh Avenue station 28 Talk:List of streetcar lines in Brooklyn 29 Seventh Avenue 30 Vandalism 31 Queens Boulevard 32 Delancey-Essex Streets 33 E service 34 nycsubway.org 35 Tunnels vs. lines 36 My bot's edits 37 IRT Lexington Avenue Line 38 Kindly restore the following pages 39 Goethean/Gadrane 40 Goethean the revert king 41 Fellow New Yorker 42 En dashes, again 43 Template:MNRR 44 NYCS logo 45 DCarltonsm again 46 R68 (New York City Subway car) 47 Request for comment 48 New Utrecht Avenue-62nd Street (BMT Sea Beach and West End Lines) 49 Virgie Arthur

[edit] Long-Overdue RfA Thanks from Alphachimp

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA WP:100). I guess infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Wikipedia. With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page or email me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you. (Thanks go to Blnguyen for the incredible photo to the right.) alphaChimp laudare 01:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks buddy. alphaChimp ^laudare 01:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Michael Hertz Associates

Thanks for the message - I wrote the article this weekend (Michael Hertz Associates) based on a bit of text and some URLs he emailed me, and told him you'd look it over when you had some time. I've done pretty much all I can do, and I think he may do a little editing himself – I encouraged him to only make minor revisions and to resist the temptation to turn it into a moving tribute with Busby Berkeley-type choreography and dancing girls. ;-) I hope it works out where you can work with him – he seems like he has a lot to share. Thanks again - Baseball,Baby! ^{balls•strikes} 05:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MORE Subway Changes

These subway vandals are back. A new IP user has vandalized the B and D articles. This is starting to get dumb. Can you do something about them? --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 22:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The return of User: Samstayton

Hey, if you want to entertain yourself, check out the recent edits by User:Samstayton. Apparently, he has returned from his hiatus to "fix" Wikipedia.

[edit] WP:NYCS

Hey, I hope you haven't left WP:NYCS. The contributions are slipping. We are also short an editor (Marc Shepherd left a couple of weeks ago). I know that you are an admin now and have to be active at other places, as well as being busy in real life, but WP:NYCS is going to need all the help it can get. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 13:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Protect your userpage.

If I were you, I would protect your userpage. This will make it impossible for IP users to vandalize your userpage, and really, who would want to edit a person's userpage anyway, except their own? --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 02:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subway table

I know you said, "if it aint broke, don't fix it", which was your response to the table I created a while back. I have to agree that that table wasn't so great anyway. But I am back with a new table. I know what you said, but this time, it's totally different. I've created a brand new table for subway services, and I have already got support from Pacific Coast Highway and the late Marc Shepherd (Marc left a couple of weeks ago). I would like you to view the WP:NYCS talk page or my sandbox subpage I created sometime ago to see a draft of my table. With the help of PCH, I am working on the table so it can benefit everyone. I would like you to view it too, and state your opinions on it. This table looks certainly better than the last one I offered, and I hope you like it. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 02:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I know that as a sysop you have to work in other places of Wikipedia, but WP:NYCS is going to need all the help we can get, especially since anyone is hardly contributing there except me (it is getting lonely there). If you ever have any free time, feel free to come back to WP:NYCS and make some contributions.

[edit] Massachusetts

So how is it in Mass.? Too bad you moved out of New York. I plan to go to NYU, and never leave New York. However, it's good to have you back, and I hope you can still contribute on a regular basis. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 14:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 0.999... != 1

Look, an integer is not a decimal. A decimal is not an integer. Mathematic proofs are irrelevant and irrespective to reality. 0.999... will always be 0.000...1 off from 1. Your revert of my edit marks you as pretentious, pedantic, and altogether unpleasant. In short, there is a good chance no one but those who hate you will come to your funeral, and many, many people will attend it.--ttogreh 23:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Reality is representative of reality. Everything else is an abstraction; an allegory meant to aid in our movement through reality. Integers, decimals, binary, octal, base 10, hex... none of these truly exist. They are thought constructs meant to help real problems get real solutions. As such, the intellectual concept of an integer is not the same as the intellectual concept of a decimal. Do you understand? Mathematics does not dictate reality; reality dictates mathematics. --ttogreh 00:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

ttogreh: I can only assume that you are actually just using your account to troll, and aren't thinking clearly about what you are saying. 1/9. = .11111..., 8/9. = .88888.... 1/9 + 8/9 = 9 / 9 = 1. We know that this final statement is true, for any reasonable definition of addition of fractions. That said, for .9999... to not equal one must be a failure on the part of using a decimal notation. -- mmt

I am not a troll. I truly believe what I say to be true, and as such, I find it very hard to take your pedantry seriously. However, that said; you are making my argument for me. All recursive decimals from 0.111... to 0.999... are failures. They are an exposure of a human flaw in abstract thought. 1/9 != 0.111... because recursive decimals do not end, while integers do. "Might as well be" is not "exactly equal", and it will always be this way. I sincerely do not understand why you cannot concede this.--ttogreh 22:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

You hit all of my points, save one; that "might as well be" is not "exactly equal". I find this quite telling. Mathematic proofs are irrespective to reality, and I can use 0.999... to represent 1 when calculating something, but that does not change the fact that recursive decimals are no where near as elegant as integers, and that 0.999... and 1 are two different things. Elegance matters. --ttogreh 04:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

You know, I have to say, if my beliefs and musings were obviously untrue and without merit, you would ignore me. I am just text on a screen to you. Yet, you continue to defend a cognitively dissonant mathematical assertion that has no substantive relevance on reality against the musings of a complete and total stranger. This leads me to suspect that one of these two things is true about you; your grasp of reality is dependent on mathematic theory, or you simply cannot let even the smallest thing go, marking you as an irretrievable pedant. Perhaps you should ask yourself why my assertions bother you so. That said, 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 != 0.333... + 0.333... + 0.333... = 0.999..., always, and forever.--ttogreh 06:58, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Forgive this one trespass. Consider two iron bars one meter away from one another. Halve the distance between them. Halve it again, and again, and again. According to mathematics, the two iron bars will never meet because the distance between them can always, and forever, be halved again. In reality, the iron atoms of the two bars will eventually become so close that atomic force will physically prevent both bars from getting any closer than they already are. Think about that. There will always be another nine. Even if the difference between 1 and 0.999... is infinitesimal, the difference can never be removed! Humans are flawed; why should our math be perfect?--ttogreh 09:25, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bowling Green (IRT Lexington Avenue Line)

Hi Larry, There's a stub article about the Battery Park Control House. This needs to be moved to something like Bowling Green IRT control house - do you know the right title to use? This could be kept as a separate article, with a little more detail and a new photo added, as part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places - it is (or they are) a beautiful building. If separate, can link to it with {{Main|Bowling Green IRT control house}} from the existing article that mentions it as the "headhouse". Or do you think the article is better as a Mergeto Bowling Green (IRT Lexington Avenue Line)?

P.S. May I suggest some reference to the entrance "characteristics" to be included in the Infobox NYCS for each station? This is a great entrance, while others are little more than a door in a wall, etc., &tc. Perhaps general categories to help people identify the entry - curb, exit only, sidewalk/building, dedicated building entry (interior), control house …. For your consideration. The subways are actually very cool in general, and the new station they're building downtown especially. The articles in the Project help to see that. Thanks —Dogears (talk • contribs) 16:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aaron Gray

Thank you for moderating the AfD, a civil result, yet inconclusive, result was achived. Can I ask that in the future the Edit summary (when removing the AfD tag) include the results of the AfD? This way future editors may have find a clear trail. Including myself. :) --meatclerk 20:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User Page

Wow......just wow. I came here to tell you that you should think about fixing your user page because it streches out when other people view it and saw this. My head just exploded!--Jersey Devil 06:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I just meant that your user page doesn't seem to be properly formatted (like for instance how things look like when you do ). And it stretches out rightward because of that.--Jersey Devil 07:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh wait *slaps self on head* ...you specifically say that that is a template area! My mistake.--Jersey Devil 07:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thames Valley College (London, Ontario, Canada)

You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thames Valley College (London, Ontario, Canada) as delete. I think this AfD was a problem because the nominator claimed that it was a diploma mill and some other participants seemed to believe him, when in fact it isn't. The reference to it being investigated by Trading Standards (a British term) clearly suggests that they were thinking about a British institution with a similar name. On the basis of the confusion in this AfD, could you change your decision to "no consensus" or relist the AfD? --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 17:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you for your reply. As you suggested, I have listed the page at Wikipedia:Deletion_review. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 00:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thames Valley College (London, Ontario, Canada) on deletion review

I have asked for a deletion review of Thames Valley College (London, Ontario, Canada). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 00:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Michel Bauwens

Hi, could you look into this? It seems that the afd on Michel Bauwens was closed as "keep", but that User:ForrestLane42 replaced the afd tag anyways. Now there is another afd debate going on. User:ForrestLane42 has been causing some trouble lately with harrassment[1][2] [3] and probable sockpuppetry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Goethean (talk • contribs) 23:00, 22 December, 2006.

Thank you for looking into Michel Bauwens and ForrestLane42. I agree that there is not enough evidence for disciplinary measures. But I stand by my description of his actions as harrassment. Chicago Humanities Festival is an article that I created recently. ForrestLane42's contributions until now have been limited to articles related to Ken Wilber. The most logical way for him to have found his way to the Chicago Humanities Festival article was through my "contributions" link. When he found a low-traffic article that I had edited, he tried to nominate it for deletion in order to spite me. Although there is probably little objective evidence for sockpuppetry, I and another editor of the Ken Wilber article agree that Truthiness406 is a sock. This is based on Truthiness' sudden appearance, his support of ForrestLane's arguments, and subsequent disappearance. But that certainly doesn't qualify as undeniably compelling. — goethean ॐ 16:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Larry I would like to add that me (LoveMonkey) and the administrator MONGO have also experience Goethan and his disrespectful threats and browbeating tactics. If you need documentation on his conduct please leave me a message on my talkpage. LoveMonkey 07:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

According to your user page it says: Note that using the text to recreate the deleted content is speedyable, and using it to keep it hanging around in your userspace has gotten editors penalized before. But that's your problem.

Now looking at Michel Bauwens, it has deleted page content Pluralities-Integration creeping into Michel Bauwens page seemingly by goethean, isn't this penalization according to your above statement, can u clarify for me? ForrestLane42 14:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

[edit] Minor edits

Okay, Larry, thanks for the tip. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 07:21, 25 December 2006 (UTC) P.S. Merry Christmas:).

[edit] Subway table

One suggestion:

The icon should go under the name due to the fact that readors (non-Wikipedians) would view the table and see the icon underneath. Having the icon come after the name wouldn't do so great due to the fact that the icon and text are just nearly the same color.

Remember, articles (including tables, infoboxes, etc.) are/should be optimized for readers over editors, and for a general audience over specialists. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 07:42, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] goethean and me

I think you should hear my side of the story, as you see goethean and I have a very votatile relationship, he constantly has been disrespect to me as an editor and refuse to have good faith with me. He is upset that I too have an interest in integral matters and I happen not to be in his favor on those views, I have tried hard to be civil with goethean, but its impossible at times. I asked a friend to look at the problem and he gave his two cents, yes Truthiness, I allowed him to use my computer to discuss his views, I hardly think its sockpuppetry, if so, im sorry. But goethean has a vandetta against me for a long time, and I wish it to stop....ForrestLane42 04:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)ForrestLane42

[edit] 42nd Street-Fifth Avenue-Bryant Park

The Bryant Park transferpoint station name is seen on mini-maps from the MTA. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 07:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Note: I myself think it will be a good idea to call the stations transfer points instead of station complexes. Calling a station a transfer point if one can transfer to another train without leaving the system would make more sense. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 02:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Major reorganization at WP:NYCS

Now instead of just the subway, we're going to tackle all of the MTA's operations. Drop a line at WT:NYCS. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{talk • contribs}} 05:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question

My experience of debates on wikipedia is that they've last a good couple of weeks. After a day or two this one was closed why?. You also went for keep when everyone was saying delete more or less. Can you please can you reopen this, there is no way this is was done fairly. It should remain open for a few more days at least so others can get their opinion in. Angel Emfrbl 10:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Three Great Powers on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Three Great Powers. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Angel Emfrbl 11:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] En dashes

Are you sure en dashes should be used in the titles? I've never seen this done before. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 00:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't really have a problem with them, but if it is not supported by WP:NAME, then we probably shouldn't go with the en dashes, just to be on the safe side. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 17:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as it is not violating anything...the en dashes can stay. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 17:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] how to delete

I seem to have consensus on Diane Stein for deletion, how do I delete the page? What next is in the process, please check the page and tell me what to do, thanks! ForrestLane42 22:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

thank you Larry V on comments regarding Diane Stein, if in a month it doesn't seem to change, I will check back on the proper code on bringing it to delete debate. But after five days, if I remember correctly there was 2 keep and 2 deletes, and my switch from merger to delete,making it 3 deletes and 2 keeps after 5 days, so I believe it was safe to assume otherwise ForrestLane42 03:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

[edit] smear campaign

Larry V, can you please do something about user: goethean, he keeps leaving harrassment notes on my user page, smearing my integrity and reputation. I know goethean and I do not see eye to eye on wikipedia edits that I feel worthy, but he keeps getting upset over edits I do and tracking me down. I feel harrassed by him because he keeps besmearing me on every wikipedia page, I can't help it that I have similar areas of knowledge as he. please help!!! ForrestLane42 03:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

Larry V, thank you for your comments on my talk page and will take them into consideration. If possible, I think goethean in a measure of good faith owes me a public apology since he has smeared my reputation. ForrestLane42 15:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

Since you have decided to push your luck, ForrestLane42, I have a simple question. How did you happen upon the Chicago Humanities Festival article? Was it just a completely random choice, or were you cherry-picking from my contributions? — goethean ॐ 16:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Larry V, see what I mean...he does not assume good faith, can u please look at his archives on his talk page, I think he deserves some kind of stronger response. First off I do not have to reply to Goethean's accusations and smears. Second, if you look at his archive, he has been involved in arbitrations, has violated the 3-revert rule in the past and has violated it on several occassions on the Ken Wilber page with me and others. I dont know how abusive one has before someone takes action. ForrestLane42 16:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

But the point is he has erred!!! I keep saying this, he has violated good faith with me from the beginning, he has violated the 3-revert rule, and he makes false accusations that he really can't back them up. So yeah an apology that explicits assumes --- good faith, otherwise he is does not have to take any responsibility for his actions, and errors. I am more than willing to admit to my sh@t in regards to goethean, but there can be no fresh air when he gets to avoid any responsibility. A step in the right direction is a sincere and honest apology with no cloaked innuedos. As for finger-pointing, Larry V, who threw the first punch?? I am so much at my wits end with him, that it makes me want to forget about trying to be an editor. He has made accusations against me - so how is it finger-pointing when I am calling on his sh!t??? You are in fact insiuating that we are some kids in some fight, which I can see how u and others might think exactly that but when u have someone who has never assumed good faith, edits like he is in charge it is irritatingForrestLane42 23:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

Larry V, again look to Ken Wilber page, goethean is again attacking me personally. How many times does he get to be abusive towards me until someone takes action? Politely asking him to refrain doesn't work anymore. ForrestLane42 16:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

Larry V, thank you again for stepping in. All I would like to say is yes I am in inexperienced editor at this time, who is striving to become better at it. In response to goethean 'rational response', I disagree he was looking to bait me into an arguement and I would not go there. He is mistaken on his views of me. I can not help his views. I ask you to take into consideration the fact that an editor for 3 years has a volatile history with not just me but a few others. I feel its important to look at his history of many edit wars with other editors. I invite you to call on their opinion of him. Also look at the fact that I have edited other pages with relatively no problem ie Fromm, Rogers, etc. I admit I have been hasty at times in my editing, sometimes even a bad speller, but I have tried to be NPOV as possible as much as humans can be. Sincerely, ForrestLane42 15:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

[edit] IRC

You're added, just type /msg chanserv invite #wikipedia-en-admins before joining. If you've got a cloak, I or someone else can set it up so you don't have to type that every time. --Interiot 06:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seventh Avenue station

I noticed that you moved the station article from NYCS to IND Qns Blvd Line. If you must know, the station is shared by two lines, which means it should have New York City Subway after it. I know that you moved it because of your reason provided by your edit summary. It doesn't seem like a very good reason to me, because it could be that the emergency exit sign is an error, and isn't sufficiently concrete evidence unless backed up with something else. Of course, to clear disambiguation with the station in Brooklyn, just use the {{otheruses4}} template. (See also New York City Subway chaining.)

All in all, I do show great respect for your contributions, however, the title should be Seventh Avenue, for reasons I've given. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 23:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:List of streetcar lines in Brooklyn

The table on the talk page goes into more detail, and there are other notes below. --NE2 03:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It's information for improving the article and other related artices. How is that not appropriate for the talk page? --NE2 04:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

If it's in my user space, it's implied that others can't edit it. However, I don't mind if people make corrections to it. --NE2 04:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Some of the information is too "crufty", like the exact streets used, but may be useful to others. Other information is unfinished. --NE2 04:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

"Share material: The talk page can be used to store material from the article which has been removed because it is not verified, so that time can be given for references to be found. New material can sometimes be prepared on the talk page until it is ready to be put into the article." --NE2 05:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

That's from Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. --NE2 05:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

OK - looks good. --NE2 05:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seventh Avenue

I think the article should be located at (IND Queens Boulevard Line), since it is on the Queens Boulevard Line. It is chained as so, and the emergency exit signs are in our favor. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pacific Coast Highway (talk • contribs).

[edit] Vandalism

Hi. Do you think this uer needs a blocking? Thanks. Xiner (talk, email) 01:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Queens Boulevard

Sorry for changing from one unclear reference to another. I guess it's all in how a person read each (six lanes, three lanes) version... the "and a service road on each side" is where it got really muddy. The version that I edited gave me the impression that there were 14 lanes on QB! Thanks for throwing in the "in each direction" on the page. I'll try harder (not "better"!) next time. SkipperRipper 00:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delancey-Essex Streets

This name is on the map, it does not need to be reviewed. It is on MTA literature, and it is not awkwardly long. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 00:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Didn't mean to sound like I was scolding you or anything. :) --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 01:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] E service

I see you have reverted my expansion edits to the E. What I'd do here is follow the same format as the A and make different headings and have different tables for branches. Same for the 5, have a different table for the branches and sections. I don't know if that will help, but I will try it out in my sandbox subpage and see how it comes out. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 02:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

That's very true, Larry. 5 trains go onto the West Side to clear congestion, and Jamaica Center is not as big as179th Street. Same thing for Flatbush Av. That station, compared to Crown Heights, has capacity restrictions, so 2 and 5 trains often go to New Lots or Crown Heights. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 03:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right, the junction causes problems for 2 and 5 trains, and have you seen the track map for Jamaica Center, for both levels? It is pretty far. There are tracks that continue east for layups, which was originally for a planned extension which never made the cut. But there were plans to re-align the junction, though. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 03:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] nycsubway.org

Can you please link me to where the permission was given? --NE2 07:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The MTA answers quicker than usual, about a week, tops. --Imdanumber1 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tunnels vs. lines

It doesn't look like the tunnels are considered separately; references show the 53rd Street Tunnel as parts of both the 53rd Street Line and the Queens Boulevard Line; the 14th Street and Belmont Tunnels are also clearly parts of lines. [4] shows that the Cranberry Street Tunnel is part of the Eighth Avenue Line. --NE2 00:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Interestingly, in 1981, the entire line to Borough Hall and maybe Bowling Green was the New Lots Line: [5] I've also found some articles saying Borough Hall is on the Lex, but I'm pretty sure 138th in the Bronx isn't: [6] I can't tell what it was built as, but that probably won't help. --NE2 00:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that the 138th Street station would fall under lex because it opened around the same time as the rest of the stations between Grand Central and 138th Street: they opened on July 7, 1918. If that's the case, then the station falls under Lexington Avenue, instead of Jerome Avenue. --Imdanumber1 (talk | contribs) 01:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

When the lines were planned, the Lexington Avenue Line was defined to end at 135th Street, where it split into the Jerome Avenue and Pelham Lines: [7] But the actual split is at 125th Street. --NE2 02:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

That is when it was planned, it's possible things may've changed when it was being built. --Imdanumber1 (talk | contribs) 02:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

OK - once I finish tagging Broadway-Seventh Avenue Line stations I'll join the discussion. --NE2 03:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Shall we move this discussion there? --NE2 04:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll continue tagging; let me know when you're ready. --NE2 04:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My bot's edits

I'll bring it up to Alpha. --Imdanumber1 (talk | contribs) 01:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IRT Lexington Avenue Line

I reverted your removal of all the citations for the extent of the line. The sources clearly state that the line runs from Lower Manhattan to East Harlem, but no one has found one that takes it through to Brooklyn.

You also changed IRT Eastern Parkway Line back to the old version, which claims that the name applies east of Utica Avenue. Can you please provide a reliable source for that? Thank you. --NE2 20:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kindly restore the following pages

I request that content of following pages be restored for temporary basis. I have some very important information that i compiled over last few months. I'll highly appreciate your assistance.

• India
• Australia
• Paintings
• others
• Chandigarh

Please send me an email when the pages are available so i can get the content. I promise i'll get rid of the pages immediately after. Also i apologize for ignorance.

Thanks, Sameer (sameer81@gmail.com)

[edit] Goethean/Gadrane

Please look into goethean again. There is strong evidence to suggest he has at least 2 sockpuppets, see his talk page and how he reverted someone who asked him to account for his POV bias. Please see my talk page, telling me not to write on his talk page. Then look at Ken Wilber page again, he reverts my edit to gadrane's edit, who I believe is one of his sockpuppets, both refused to bring it to discussion. Ken Wilber page is in active mediation. This is nonsense on his part. He clearly is abusing his editorial powers. There needs to be decisive action against him. He has already got me blocked for 24 hour on 3RR rule, even though he has done it several times on Ken Wilber page and elsewhere, and his suspected sockpuppet gadrane does the same.He is a tyrant to an enterprise meant to be open to all. This goes beyond my personal hostilities in editing. He crosses the line repeated. He keeps getting into mediation disputes outside Ken Wilber page. ForrestLane42 20:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)ForrestLane42

[edit] Goethean the revert king

Can this guy just do what ever the hell he wants on his talk page???

see: [8] [9] [10]

Thank you128.241.108.73 20:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fellow New Yorker

Yeah, I'm in Chelsea. Small world, huh? Xiner (talk, email) 15:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

MIT...I didn't get into that...Xiner (talk, email) 23:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] En dashes, again

I think we should limit our use of en-dashes, because the standard keyboard uses hyphens, which is what most editors use because of their keyboard configuration. We shouldn't necessary use them in titles, mostly piped links. Any opinions? --Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs) 01:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I usually try to avoid redirects. I would usually use them for shortcuts, but other than that, I don't really like them. --Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:MNRR

You might be busy, but can you please add the TfD notice to the templates you added at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 January 25#Template:MNRR, so it's clear those templates are nominated for deletion? Thanks. Tinlinkin 21:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NYCS logo

I don't know; there's no source on the image description page. --NE2 01:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DCarltonsm again

Here's his IP address.I'm also bringing it up to WP:AIV. --Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] R68 (New York City Subway car)

Hi there, should this page replaced it from this tage {{tprotected}} protected template to better appropriate tag {{sprotected }} semi-protected template it's just mianly DCarltonsm and his other/newely IP address users will not vandal on that page again. --BWCNY 04:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for comment

I have filed a request for comment in regard to ForrestLane42's conduct. — goethean ॐ 21:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Utrecht Avenue-62nd Street (BMT Sea Beach and West End Lines)

You deleted this redirect, but it's been linked from List of newly-formed bus routes in Brooklyn since I created it. --NE2 02:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Virgie Arthur

Hi could you please put on the deleted article on Virgie Arthur again? i dont now if you can but i think its best to put it on again so people can discuss how they want to do with ti. because it was only 2 people discussing it before and decided to delete a fullworthy article--Matrix17 14:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)