Hello Dubyavee! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. You may also push the signature button located above the edit window. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! -- youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 02:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 02:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism is a good start. youngamerican (wtf?) 15:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--JimWae 20:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was surprised that there was no article on this raid so I created it. I would appreciate it if you would take a look at it. I double checked the information in several sources and I think it is accurate. Thanks, Dubyavee (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Nice job on the article. I took a quick pass through and gave you some formatting assistance. I did not have the energy to search out all of the town names that you included, so you should investigate which of those should be turned into wiki links -- town names are frequently linked in these articles. Hal Jespersen (talk) 00:49, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I find the article on the history of WV interesting, but it doesn't really explain how the Federal Government was able to admit a state into the Union whose territoy had come from another state without the permission of that said state. The Federal Government did not recognize VA's secession, so carving WV out of VA without VA's approval seems a bit unconstitutional.

Also, do you know if there was ever a movement to reuinte the two Virginias? Thanks 98.221.131.77 (talk) 01:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • Hi. A Supreme Court ruling early in the 19th Cent. gave the president of the US the right to recognize any rival governments within a state, and Lincoln recognized the Wheeling government as the legitimate, loyal government of Virginia. Once Wheeling had that recognition they were able to form a government, with a governor and legislature, and that government eventually granted itself, basically, permission to form a new state. Congress had a right to refuse that new state, but once Congress did approve, the last obstacle would have been a presidential veto, but Lincoln was persuaded to sign the statehood bill. The constitutionality of the state has never been directly challenged, the only challenge was to West Virginia's claim to 2 counties, Berkeley and Jefferson, and the Court ruled in favor of WV.

As far as re-uniting, as one US Congressman said, we have the means to create new states, but are we able to recreate them once they have been split? Virginia approached the Wheeling government about reunification in the late 1860's, but Wheeling at that time was even more radical than it had been during the war and wouldn't even consider it. The people at no time were ever given the choice. If you want to read about the constitutionality of WV, here is a digitized version of JG Randall's "Constitutional Problems Under Lincoln", the WV essay is about the last one. http://libsysdigi.library.uiuc.edu/OCA/Books2009-06/constitutionalpr00rand/

• Thanks, but I have one more question now: Instead of forming a new state, why didn't the Wheeling government just claim to be the legitimate government of all of Virginia? The idea being that after the Civil War, the Wheeling Government would then control the state in its entirety. Or was there a fear that upon Union victory, the Federal Government would readmit Virginia and recognize the Richmond government, effectively ending the Wheeling government's legitimacy? 98.221.131.77 (talk) 02:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for the note. I don't usually get involved in the article History of Virginia. It's a mess, and beyond my interest to fix up. Over time, I've made it worse by dumping the various overly detailed paragraphs that get added to the history section at main article on Virginia onto the subarticle, without trying to work them in. But in general, we don't need all that much on the split between the states on that article, and it probably should focus on what it meant to (the state that is now) Virginia. Somethings that I think make some sense in the article include the 1991 border commission, which might go in the Modern history section, and information on why the states didn't rejoin after the war. I also think the division of West Virginian soldiers that was added yesterday is good.

However, I agree that some of the edits from yesterday are not encyclopedia in style, and unnecessarily confrontational. I think the first move in any content dispute is post on the talk page, Talk:History of Virginia, and see if we can get a discussion going. Otherwise, would you want me go in and try to work on any of this? I don't think you should surrender from editing Virginia related articles quite yet.-- Patrick {_oѺ^∞} 19:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was recently suggested that WikiProject West Virginia might be inactive or semiactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. I have started a discussion on the projects talk page soliciting the opinions of the members of the project if this project would be interested in being supported by WikiProject United States. Please feel free to comment on your opinions about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 19:55, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 15:04, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 01:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:57, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please check behind me on my comments, especially relative to WV. Also, I took a shot at rewriting the VA to WV paragraph under the article Confederate States of America#States beginning "In Virginia, several populous northwestern counties..." Thanks. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 21:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tried a shot at History of Virginia intro rewrite into four paragraphs. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 01:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please contribute your comment/sources at Talk:Confederate States of America#RFC Infobox flag choice to select the flag representing an historic nation-state 1861-1865 from three alternatives, a flag _____ .

a) sourced as flown everywhere in the Confederacy, 1861-1864,

b) sourced as "not satisfactory" at the time 1863-1865, or

c) sourced as "never" seen by 1865 participants. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 23:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:07, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dubyavee, I noticed that you had uploaded an escaped slave broadside from Hampshire County dated 1845. Would you happen to know which of Hampshire County's two newspapers in operation at that time? I'm expanding Virginia Argus and Hampshire Advertiser and believe that this broadside may have originated from this paper, although the South Branch Intelligencer was also printed in Romney at this time. Any assistance you could provide would be of the greatest help! -- Caponer (talk) 14:23, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info Dubyavee--much appreciated! Happy New Year, sir! -- Caponer (talk) 01:11, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dubyavee, I recently completed the article for Valley View (Romney, West Virginia), a former plantation north of Romney, hence my interest in the List of plantations in West Virginia. Since you did such an awesome and thorough job in writing the History of slavery in West Virginia article, I was wondering if you could sanity check and review this article and provide any suggestions or edits. It's more architecturally-focused, and less slavery-focused, but I like your writing style. In the meantime, I'm still trying to identify and add former plantations in West Virginia to the aforementioned list, and I will be writing a few paragraphs as a lead in utilizing some of the sources you used for your article. As always, any guidance you could provide would be of the greatest help! Thanks again! Also, you may also be interest in taking a look at another recent article for Wappocomo (Romney, West Virginia). -- Caponer (talk) 16:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• P.S. Have you considered submitting the History of slavery in West Virginia article for Good Article review? It's outstanding. -- Caponer (talk) 16:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• For your situational awareness, I've finished the prose for the List of plantations in West Virginia article. Does this jive with History of slavery in West Virginia? -- Caponer (talk) 22:10, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

a discussion has been started here regarding your edit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Mint_Julep.2C_clear_vandalism

If you wish to discuss this you are welcome to reply on my talk page or the ani board, thank you for your contributions.Drinkreader (talk) 18:37, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that this may be stale, which I am learning is the kiss of death at WP, three years old is stale, but I made an observation or two at Virginia in the American Civil War#West Virginia following your dialogue with Rjensen. I generally defer to Rjensen, but I wondered if there was something more to be added describing the western Virginians...if not, not. Thanks anyway. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 09:41, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Restored Government of Virginia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Governor of Virginia and Father of West Virginia'', Univ. of North Carolina, 1937, pg. 419, note 36)</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:35, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Slave and free states, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Carlile. 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) 16:50, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bible Belt may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• org/americas-most-and-least-bible-minded-cities-2/] America's Most and Least Bible-Minded Cities[</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I'm expanding the Virginia Conventions article, and wonder if the Second Wheeling Convention in 1861 should qualify establishing a Restored Government of Virginia. Do you know of any sources for the Convention other than Virgil A. Lewis, How West Virginia Was Made, 1909? TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 16:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of slavery in West Virginia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blakeley. 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) 10:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At Virginia in the American Civil War, an editor over the past few months has added another photo to the gallery at “Notable Civil War leaders (Confederate)", making the category one more than that for “Notable Civil War leaders (Union)”. In keeping with our agreed perspective that the Civil War was a war of brothers in Virginia just as much as Kentucky or Tennessee, I hoped that you might be able to supply another photo to the Union side of Virginia’s ledger, I guess another easterner would be best, as there is little point in simply replicating "West Virginians in the American Civil War". But my rationale for those I listed from the west had careers in the Virginia Assembly, the Convention of 1850, the Convention of 1861, or the Restored Government of Virginia -- they were not exclusively or primarily West Virginia careers.

I note that western born post-war West Virginia U.S. Senator Alan T. Caperton was one of those serving as a Virginia Confederate Senator, but he is not in the list of West Virginians at the West Virginia in the American Civil War. Well, thanks in advance for any help. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 18:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the previous assist at Virginia in the American Civil War. At Virginia Conventions I am expanding the article from a sort of hagiography for the First Five Conventions of the Revolutionary period, to include representing some of the delegate speeches in debates from each Convention including the later general conventions through 1902 and short summary sections on the 20th Century limited conventions and constitutional commissions.

I have little in my secondary sources for either the Wheeling delegate speeches or for the Restored Convention of 1864 in Alexandria abolishing slavery in Virginia. I see that there is a copy online of Virgil A. Lewis, How West Virginia Was Made, Proceedings of the First Con- vention...And the Journal of the Second Convention...at Wheeling, but is there a collection of notable speeches excerpted in a secondary source, like that found for the Richmond Secession Convention in Freehling's "Showdown in Virginia"? TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 22:14, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've completed a first run through from the sources readily available to me to write up the Virginia Conventions, including the Second Wheeling Convention, First Session which I believe to be most applicable to Virginia history. Any contribution or comment would be welcome. It is classified as a start class article. Thanks in advance. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 07:47, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. Amazingly, there is no mention of Virginia and West Virginia’s Unconditional Union Party membership during the Civil War at the article. It focuses on Missouri, and “other” border states, mainly Maryland. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 05:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dubyavee. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my last reply at Talk:West Virginia was meant to go at the bottom but since I am on an Iphone it is difficult for me to move it, if you could move it to the bottom for me it would be ok with me. Thanks. 172.58.185.136 (talk) 14:36, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

that you can tell me how I can get access to Project MUSE? I have looked over the article and could not find the answer. Thanks, Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:21, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Which article do you mean? I applied through Wikipedia for access to Project Muse a few years ago. I don't know if they are still taking requests for access, but if there is something you need to know let me know what it is and I will look it up for you, Dubyavee (talk) 16:50, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, nothing specific right now - though Confederate monuments seem to be on everyone's mind. I just saw the category and thought, "I'd like, and probably use, that." I do have access to JSTOR that I applied for and got years ago and I wander through it now and again. Though come to think of it, have not searched for Confederate statues there. I did dust email Huffington Post critizing a recent Rush to Judgement article about the Lee & Jackson in Baltimore. A letter my Ph.D. in history daughter proofed and suggested that I not send. Well now I am just gossiping. I will look for Project Muse and see what I can find. Carptrash (talk) 17:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I find about 50% (not scientifically determined) of the stuff at the list of Confederate monuments to be "extra verbiage." I am going to chip away at it, but until it is decided that the SPLC document was not found by Joseph Smith along with the golden tables of the Book of Mormon I fear there is little hope. Still, I will not be rules by fear. Carptrash (talk) 20:47, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dubyavee. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dubyavee. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dubyavee. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dubyavee! I agree with you on the issue with the 2nd West Virginia Volunteer Cavalry Regiment. I made an edit and discussed a solution on the talk page. You appear to be familiar with the George Tyler Moore Center for the Study of the Civil War. They were very helpful to me (especially Tom White, now retired) when I was researching my ancestor that fought in the 2nd West Virginia Cavalry. Tom was surprised that my ancestor was in the 2nd instead of the 1st given his German-Wheeling background. Have you thought about upgrading 3rd West Virginia Volunteer Cavalry Regiment? TwoScars (talk) 21:34, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tbanks, TwoScars. I will take a look at the 3rd. It is something of an organizational mess from what I've read, I have the GTMoore cd-rom Mountaineers in Blue and Gray, I'll see what I can do. Dubyavee (talk) 05:01, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Chapman's Artillery.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Very nice sequence of articles on the Confederate army. Keep up the good work.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:36, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MarkMcCain and DubyaVee. I've looked over the editing battle in List of West Virginia Civil War Union units. Mark, I urge you to get the book called West Virginia and the Civil War: Mountaineers Are Always Free by Mark A. Snell. I purchased the e-book version through Amazon. It can be read on a Kindle or iPad (I use both). Snell has connections with the George Tyler Moore Center for the Study of the Civil War at Shepherd University. They have all kinds of records and can be counted on as one of the best sources for studying the Civil War in West Virginia. Like you, I have relied on Lang's Loyal West Virginia book when sources are difficult to find. However, Lang definitely has a lot of "puffery" in his book (and some mistakes), and it is best to find additional sources when possible. I believe Snell is a source that can be trusted, and he takes the time to explain the difference between the 32,000 Union soldiers used by some sources and his 20,000 to 22,000.

Mark and DubyaVee, West Virginia needs more people like you. Instead of "butting heads", why not separately enhance the Wikipedia West Virginia Civil War articles. Here are some of the articles that I believe need to be enhanced: Battle of Droop Mountain, Battle of Charleston (1862), Albert G. Jenkins, 3rd West Virginia Volunteer Cavalry Regiment, Benjamin Franklin Kelley, 1st West Virginia Volunteer Infantry Regiment (3 Year), and Blazer's Scouts. Remember, the best etiquette is to focus on your own article. If you begin work on one of these (or one that I did not list), make sure you both are not working on the same article. Shepherdstown Historic District could use some improvements too. Thanks TwoScars (talk) 22:25, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DubyaVee - Regarding WV articles, including List of West Virginia Civil War Union units and West Virginia in the American Civil War, I don't think there is much that I can do beyond what I have already done. Perhaps Wikipedia:Dispute resolution is where you need to go. TwoScars (talk) 16:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He definitely acts before thinking things through completely. I had to fix some damage he did to 1st West Virginia Volunteer Cavalry Regiment on June 13. It is a shame his enthusiasm is not used for more productive/creative endeavors instead of messing with things that have already been researched. TwoScars (talk) 20:35, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, TwoScars, it could be just a lack of sources other than the internet. I will redo the "Soldiery" section on West Virginia in the American Civil War in a few days and try to lay it out logically so there is no misunderstanding. Thanks for your input. Dubyavee (talk) 21:50, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	US Banknote Contest
	November-December 2019
There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons. In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate. If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here

Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)[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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Confederate government in West Virginia. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I too have grown tired of MarkMcCain's edits that do not have good citations. I've tried to stay positive and get him to use his enthusiasm in a good way, but he seems to only make edits that are not correct or that do not have a citation that meets Wikipedia Good Article criteria. I may stop working with West Virginia Wikipedia articles. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to Peacemaker67) is the Lead Coordinator for Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. He does not have any "authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers", but may have good suggestions on how to handle this. TwoScars (talk) 19:27, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The best place to deal with editor conduct issues is WP:ANI where uninvolved admins can help sort things out. I suggest you provide half-a-dozen diffs showing the problematic conduct and explain what you have already done to try to ameliorate the issues (attempts to discuss on talk pages etc). Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:07, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to see if you agree with what he has done to the lead in 1st West Virginia Volunteer Cavalry Regiment. I think it is great if they are the regiment with the most MOH recipients, but the only evidence I have ever seen is GTM Center saying most of any West Virginia regiment. His footnotes do nothing to prove that they received the most of any regiment (and they are in the lead). Also he is counting a 15th person who was in the 1st WVA Cavalry but received the MOH when fighting with the 1st West Virginia Infantry. As usual, this stuff is good if true, but the proof is not there. TwoScars (talk) 17:24, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1st West Virginia is one of the "half-a-dozen diffs". I still think it is a shame his enthusiasm can not be used in a good way. Perhaps if Peacemaker67 would ask him to fix up 1st West Virginia Volunteer Infantry Regiment (3 Year) to Good Article status—and MarkMcCain would be willing to try—he would learn proper citations and conform to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Military history. If you agree that this is a good idea, one of us should ask Peacemaker67 to ask him. TwoScars (talk) 20:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Our friend MarkMcCain is at it again. This time messing with the intro for Battle of Droop Mountain. His changes don't agree with two books that I have, but agree with an old interpretation of the results of the battle. I don't like it. I reverted his edits, but assume trouble will continue. It seems to me that he is willing to mess with other people's work, but will not take the time to write a complete article by himself. Grrrrr.... I hoped he would funnel his energy into neglected West Virginia regiments such as 3rd West Virginia Cavalry Regiment, but he has not. He is the reason I got out of military articles for a while. TwoScars (talk) 16:55, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, TwoScars (talk) I will keep an eye out for changes, he rewrote the page on West Virginia's Union soldiers using old data. The trouble with Wiki is that there is no way to effectively handle disruptions in a simple way, so most people don't bother. Thanks for the note. Dubyavee (talk) 17:03, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at History of West Virginia. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft is a proposed split from History of West Virginia. Splitting should be discussed on the talk page of the parent article, on Talk:History of West Virginia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Confederate government in West Virginia and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Confederate government in West Virginia, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 18:23, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dubyavee! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:23, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore the first comment that there is not enough content for a separate article, but follow the second comment to discuss at Talk:History of West Virginia about whether to split. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:46, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dubyavee and Robert McClenon: with all due respect to the demonstrated expertise and well respected accomplishments of Robert McClenon in his polyglot mastery of the English language, science, and computer programming, I'd like to tentatively make several observations as a logical syllogism (a box on Mr. McClenon's User Page):

(1) Wikipedia has previously allowed stand-alone articles related to US state government by the Confederacy among "seceded" states and those claimed to have "seceded" by the Confederacy, described in reliable sources of the period as represented by eleven stars both in the official flag and in the battle flag of the Confederate States of America.

(2) Among states with both US Congress and CS Congress delegations, Wikipedia has NOW published:

(i) a Stub article for Confederate government of Missouri of 4,345 bytes.

(ii) a C-class article for the pro-Union Restored Government of Virginia of 16,945 bytes.

(iii) a Featured article for Confederate government of Kentucky of 32,913 bytes.

(3) Therefore, the proposed stand-alone article for West Virginia's Confederate governance of 60,892 bytes should NOT be rejected out-of-hand for "not enough content for a separate article".

(Aside for contextual reference in a sample article: Mr. McClenon's C-class article Treaty on Open Skies of 25,754 bytes has not been challenged for removal to my knowledge for the "not enough content" objection.)

(4) RECOMMEND:

(i) Prior to RFCs or any other procedural efforts to salvage the proposed article, RETITLE the proposed article to the following: "Confederate government [of] West Virginia", so as to CONFORM to Wikipedia naming conventions currently in use for history articles on THREE of the FOUR border states in the US as of 1863 represented by both US and CS Congressional Districts.

(ii) On publication of "Confederate government of West Virginia", in all four related articles, place the links to the other three in the series in the "See also" section of each article.

(5) CONCLUSION: Complete the four-part article series related to US states with both US and CS Congressional representation during the American Civil War on Wikipedia by publishing the proposed fourth article, "Confederate government of West Virginia". TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 14:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Confederate government in West Virginia, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:23, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dubyavee. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Confederate government in West Virginia".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 11:20, 16 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) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited West Virginia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mid-Atlantic. 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use bare urls in footnotes, as you recently did on History of slavery in West Virginia. They can't be backed up. See Wikipedia:Citation templates for how to do it. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 23:59, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They definitely should be two separate pages. I did some preliminary work on a 26th Virginia Infantry Battalion page that is currently in User:TwoScars/sandbox8. Some of that info has been copied and should be reworded. Some is from sources not-good-enough for Wikipedia. Good sources are hard to find, and I have numerous other projects that I am working on. Feel free to copy any of it—I am over a year away (maybe two) from having time for Edgar's Battalion. They definitely appear many times in West Virginia. I'm currently working on Battle of the Wilderness, two Maryland projects, and (for 2022) the Battle of Cedar Creek. Someday I will also get to the Battle of Lewisburg. TwoScars (talk) 20:25, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great work on 26th Virginia Infantry Battalion! I am working on Battle of Lewisburg, among other things, in my sandbox. It might be ready by spring or summer, and would remove the redtext in the infobox. I'm going to check a few Order of Battles, including Battle of White Sulphur Springs and Battle of Droop Mountain, to make sure they link to this. TwoScars (talk) 20:00, 22 January 2022 (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) 00:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dubyavee,

I just noticed your contributions re: Knotts and Cooper to the article on Dixie, which I edit from time to time (I live on Maryland's Eastern Shore, which retains traces of Dixie). I want to thank you; it's a fine addition to the article. I have long been fascinated by questions of regional identity, and gained a good deal of understanding of Dixie from the Nine Nations of North America book, but it is quite out of date. (BTW, the book includes eastern Texas in Dixie, which I surely agree with from my visits; my sister lived in Fort Worth briefly in the '80s, and it sure felt like Dixie ended somewhere between Fort Worth and Dallas.)

Since you are particularly knowledgeable re: WV, I thought I'd ask if you can suggest some particularly good references on the secession issue. I lived in central Va for many years and became intrigued with the question of how each county decided whether to stay in Virginia in 1861. Do you have any suggestions? Paulmlieberman (talk) 19:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paulmlieberman you're welcome, the Cooper/Knott article I accessed through the Wikipedia Library, though they did publish a book on their study. I have spent many years on West Virginia's Civil War history, the contemporary understanding of which is based on old wartime propaganda which was codified over the years with only occasional revision. There is a new book coming out next year by Canadian historian Scott MacKenzie from WVU Press called "The Fifth Border State" which will address these old misconceptions. In 1862 Edward Pollard (a Lost Cause historian) wrote a very perceptive paragraph on WV in his "First Year of the War" when he said "While Maryland, Kentucky, and other regions of the South...were the recipients of overflowing sympathy, and accounted a charitable stretch of imagination "sister States" of the Southern Confederacy, an odium, cruelly unjust, was inflicted upon western Virginia..." That odium manifested itself in the work of sociologist Howard W. Odum who, in his book "Southern Regions of the United States", made West Virginia part of the "Northeast" despite the fact that his own research showed it to be part of the south. He did not explain why he did that, but fellow sociologist Rupert Bayliss Vance spilled the beans, apparently Odum did it solely because of the perceived Unionism of the state during the war, although he kept Kentucky in his "south". Current research shows that WV was much more supportve of the CSA than Kentucky, but that was not the perception then. And the upshot is that Odum's book was used by many government agencies during the FDR years in setting up regional definitions. The Odum Institute at the UNC continued to follow Odum's definition when they did their Southern Focus polls in the 1990s. Odum's bias has had a domino effect to this day. I uploaded a version of Odum's map but haven't used it in any articles yet. [Rank of States Based on Twenty-three Cultural Tables] I created an article last year titled Confederate government of West Virginia which should answer a lot of your questions. I made it to match the articles of the same title for Kentucky and Missouri. I hope this is useful. Dubyavee (talk) 22:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]