Hi, Jim, User:Nightscream and I had a disagreement over certain parts of NJ municipality articles; because the discussion could potentially affect hundreds of articles, we decided to bring the discussion to WikiProject New Jersey. I would value your input in the discussion, which you can find here. Thanks, A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 15:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Djflem, I removed the incorrect description of the Hackensack River being a border of Hudson County because according to the article on the river, it ends between Jersey City and Kearny. The Hackensack never enters Essex County before joining the Newark Bay, and cannot be a border of Hudson County. You reverted my sourced change, and I was wondering if you had another source that contradicts my change. Jim Miller ^{See me | Touch me} 19:17, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the article about it says, the border between Secaucus in Hudson County and the Bergen County Meadowlands towns is the Hackensack River. It really is! Reference is cited. This is easy to check. Good luck!Djflem (talk) 19:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jim,

I just talked to some fine CU folks in San Antonio. They'd like to get an article about their CU onto wikipedia, but have made some missteps, and now have their entire CU's IP address blocked from editing. Which is way out of line from my POV. It's not like they are trying to spam wikipedia or be malicious, they are making honest mistakes in their attempts. I've given them some recommendations how to get out of jail, but I don't know who I could go to for unblocking their CU's IP. Do you know any CU-friendly admins who could do something about that? Thanks, Morriss. --Mmpartee (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me! Great news: Her account is now unblocked. I told her she may as well start a new account instead of trying to have her old account renamed via WP:CHU. I'm not sure if that means the CU's IP is now unblocked too, or what the next step is to do that. I've told her about you; she definitely would like input on the CU's article so that it passes muster. I told her what I could about third-party sources, no original research, etc. Thanks for all your help, I'm sure she will appreciate additional help too! Take care! --Mmpartee (talk) 18:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert during consensus discussion, as you did here and here. Doing so is inappropriate. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 17:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

S'okay. It happens. :-) Nightscream (talk) 22:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim! I'm the problem child writing the Firstmark Credit Union article! Thank you for offering to help. If you feel strongly about my keeping the SAT1932CU user page, I am going to trust you. I do want to change my user name to DonnaKP though. Is that possible since I already created a new account with that name?DonnaKP 15:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC) 15:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SAT1932CU (talk • contribs)

Hi Again! I decided to keep the new page after all. I left a trail from my old page to my new one if anyone wants to track me down. So I am ready to start my Firstmark Credit Union article. I am placing what I have on my talk page. Would you mind taking a look at it before I make it live? Thanks!!! DonnaKP (talk) 20:49, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are your thoughts on the info and references that I have on the page so far? Is the URL bug at the end of the paragraph the proper way to reference a website? And is the website acceptable as reference? Thanks Jim! DonnaKP (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Jim! Hope all is well. When you get a moment, could you please review what I have on my sandbox thus far? I am having problems with the way I am referencing things, but the content is there. Thanks for you assistance! DonnaKP 14:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DonnaKP (talk • contribs)

Good to hear from you. I've been thinking about making the nomination for the government shutdown article for a while now myself, but given my time has been more sparse lately, I wanted to get someone else to work with, to help make sure the nomination moves along. I'll do what I can to help out. Thanks for keeping me in the loop. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 03:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I worked to help fulfill some of the requests the reviewers have about the article. There are two dead links that they are complaining about. May you find replacements? --ZeWrestler ^Talk 04:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Thanks for taking care of the last set of comments. Do you think you can find a replacement for the "N.J. Budget With Tax Increases Likely To Influence U.S. Senate Race" source. I can't seem to find one googling. (See FAC for the comment)--ZeWrestler ^Talk 12:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm still having no luck with that last link. Have you found anything? --ZeWrestler ^Talk 22:56, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how it's live because I wasn't the one that moved it from my sandbox, but I was planning to do it today anyway. Any idea as to how that would have happened? My plan now is to leave the page alone and see what, if anything, is said about it. Thank you again for your assistance. I'm planning to create an another page on a completely different subject in the near future. I'll let you know when I make it live. DonnaKP 20:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DonnaKP (talk • contribs)

Shame that the article didn't get promoted during the FAC. However, take a look at the changes that were made to the article because of its nomination. I think this article really benefited from being nominated as its quality improved. There wasn't this much activity surrounding the article since it was brought up to good article status last year. Good working with you again. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 03:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your well-documented and well-implemented addition of New Jersey Register of Historic Places information to Clark Thread Company Historic District article. Nicely done and footnoted. I am not sure it adds much in this case though, because the NRHP listing supercedes the NJ listing, but it is okay by me.

The NJ source document for Hudson County that you provide does provide other info. Scrolling through it, i find most items are where there is both a NJ listing (SR = state register) and a NRHP listing (NR), or where there is a "SHPO opinion" which I assume means recommend not listing. However there may be places where a place is NJ-listed but not NRHP-listed. Loew's Theatre on page 8 (apparently in Jersey City?) is one. There was apparently an owner objection on that one. I assume New Jersey is the same as New York State, in this: that a historic place can be nominated by anyone, and the State may recognize it on its register, but if the owner objects it will not be NRHP-listed.

Anyhow, if you would like to do articles on the ones that are only New Jersey-listed, I would be glad to help. These would not fall under WikiProject NRHP but would fall under worldwide WikiProject Historic sites (wp:HSITES), which has a general historic sites infobox available similar to the NRHP infobox. Let me know if interested. doncram (talk) 02:55, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kudos. NJ does operate the same as you state NY does - owners may object to the NHRP listing, but not to the state listing. SHPO refers to a state issued opinion involving funding eligibility. The definitions of the different designations can be found here.

I obviously need to expand the New Jersey Register of Historic Places article since it doesn't mention the state designated, but not federal, sites at all. This, of course, will lead me to the need to create NJRHP categories. At least the existence of the hsites infobox will keep me from having to dust off my template skills (mostly copy and paste!) for a NJHRP infobox. Yikes!

Still some things to do with HSITES and template:Designation (looks like California got the color the NJ WikiProject uses from the state flag). I will probably finish adding the info to at least the Hudson County NRHP articles, and then take a look at the infobox for adding the information to the Loew's Jersey Theatre article. Expect to see me poking around at HSITES soon. Jim Miller ^{See me | Touch me} 03:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, good, and i did mainly mean kudoes. There are various ones with "COE" or with "DOE" indicated, i don't know what that means. Abbreviations for different NRHP statuses are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#NRHP codes, including one which mentions DOE also but i still don't know what it means. Oh, DOE and COE for New Jersey defined here at this NJ historic preservation office page. Determination of Eligibility and Certificate of Eligibility explained. More SR-listed but not NRHP-listed from Hudson County document:

page 10, the Staten Island Ferry Route and Terminal Sites is SR listed but not NRHP.

page 10, a U.S. Post Office

page 13, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York Railroad Company Portal Bridge, (owner objection vs. NR listing)

I see the Hudson county PDF file and other county files are avialable where the codes are defined. Will be glad to see you at HSITES. Thanks! doncram (talk) 05:26, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further, the NRIS database has info about places like Loew's Jersey Theater in Jersey City. You can get a cut-and-paste ready NRHP infobox for it by searching on "Loew" and "NJ" and checking the box for "Search for properties that have been delisted?" at Elkman's NRHP infobox generator. That has info useful for a historic sites infobox, but since the place was never NRHP listed the NRHP infobox itself should not actually be used. And some of the info put into the NRHP infobox is misleading for non-NRHP-listed places. doncram (talk) 05:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, JimMillerJr. As you may remember, way back in August I started a thread at WikiProject New Jersey to discuss the "Federal, state, and county representation" subsections in New Jersey municipality articles, as User:Nightscream and I had a substantial disagreement on that subject. Approximately two months later, we've hammered out a compromise that we mostly agree upon, and presently I am seeing if there is a consensus for this compromise. I'm leaving this message here not as canvassing, but because you participated in this discussion previously and perhaps would be interested in weighing in on the compromise. The full discussion is here, and the proposed compromise is here. Thanks in advance for participating! A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]