Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edit(s) to Daytona Beach, Florida, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. --Pilotboi / talk / contribs 06:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bellair Plaza, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Bellair Plaza satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bellair Plaza and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Bellair Plaza during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 23:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to thank you for all your contribs to the Daytona Beach related articles. I've been noticing all the edits you've been doing, as I watch just about every Daytona related article. So thanks for all of your contributions! Happy wikiediting! (P.S. I left a note on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bellair Plaza for you. --Pilotboi / talk / contribs 00:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As most of your edits have been very useful so far, be sure not to break WP:NOT#INFO. Some of your additions include simple lists that may not belong on Wikipedia. I'm not going to remove anything, but I was just suggesting you read that section to make sure you understood some Wikipedia guidelines. Have a good one! --Pilotboi / talk / contribs 03:24, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Volusia-florida.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Donald Albury 14:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Volusia-florida.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Tom (talk - email) 16:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you added some photo requests to Seminole County articles. You might want to check in the related WikiCommons category. There are lots there, and any can be used here at Wikipedia. Cheers! :) --Ebyabe (talk) 23:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I checked it out. I'm about to put up what I thought was better, but I think for requests on improvement you request a peer review so that a broader audience can go and take a look at the article. I am going to put up my comments on the article's talk page.

Cheers, --Starstriker7(^{Say hi}_{or see my works}) 23:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions to the Deland, Florida article, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later."

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question at the "Help Desk". You can also leave a message on my talk page. -- Mwanner | Talk 21:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Daytona Beach Golf Course, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daytona Beach Golf Course. Thank you.

Just read the article, and am wondering if there is anything notable about the course to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia, as it holds no events of note. I am inclined to think a single line in the Daytona Beach, Florida article would sufficiently cover the subject. As such I have placed it on the Articles for Deletion list. Please fell free to have your say there and update the article in the meantime. bigissue (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'd be glad to. Note, though, that I don't know the sport at all, just Wikipedia. Let me know when you've got something you want me to check out. Happy editing! -- Mwanner | Talk 12:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have included the U.S. Census Bureau link which confirms that a very small portion of Flagler Beach extends into Volusia County.

• 2007 Subcounty Population Estimates: Florida – The text of the Volusia County entry is as follows:

050,12,127,00000,00000,Volusia County,Florida,443343,443343,445041,451288,458517,466190,477041,486369,495813,500413
157,12,127,16525,00000,Daytona Beach city,Florida,64112,63777,63810,63861,64044,64003,64055,63945,64057,64371
157,12,127,16550,00000,Daytona Beach Shores city,Florida,4299,4337,4336,4327,4482,4464,4579,4789,4959,5090
157,12,127,16675,00000,De Bary city,Florida,15559,15559,15599,15742,15855,15997,16151,16281,16400,16464
157,12,127,16875,00000,De Land city,Florida,20904,21246,21282,21426,21631,22052,22915,24462,26076,26883
157,12,127,17200,00000,Deltona city,Florida,69543,69609,70079,71852,73682,76163,79490,82163,84087,85018
157,12,127,19825,00000,Edgewater city,Florida,18668,18819,18916,19283,19834,20208,20745,21073,21537,21647
157,12,127,22550,00000,Flagler Beach city (pt.),Florida,76,76,76,77,78,78,78,78,78,78
157,12,127,31350,00000,Holly Hill city,Florida,12119,12177,12177,12163,12536,12506,12528,12498,13343,13313
157,12,127,38025,00000,Lake Helen city,Florida,2743,2749,2751,2759,2778,2781,2795,2791,2777,2792
157,12,127,48625,00000,New Smyrna Beach city,Florida,20048,20516,20557,20693,20967,21172,21772,22260,22712,23161
157,12,127,50450,00000,Oak Hill city,Florida,1378,1449,1452,1461,1481,1484,1502,1526,1586,1592
157,12,127,51825,00000,Orange City city,Florida,6604,7921,7929,7955,7953,7958,8333,8956,9284,9471
157,12,127,53150,00000,Ormond Beach city,Florida,36301,36416,36506,36822,37134,37386,37831,38320,38378,38408
157,12,127,56425,00000,Pierson town,Florida,2596,2609,2610,2611,2612,2603,2598,2589,2584,2582
157,12,127,58200,00000,Ponce Inlet town,Florida,2513,2513,2538,2636,2695,2988,3166,3158,3151,3166
157,12,127,58575,00000,Port Orange city,Florida,45823,46208,46522,47733,49216,50591,52549,53287,54711,54901
157,12,127,67325,00000,South Daytona city,Florida,13177,13644,13666,13741,13758,13720,13753,13664,13552,13840
157,12,127,99990,00000,Balance of Volusia County,Florida,106880,103718,104235,106146,107781,110036,112201,114529,116541,117636''

The first number after the city/town name is the population of that place at the 2000 Census. The last number is the 2007 population estimate. There were 76 Flagler Beach residents living in Volusia County in 2000. That number had grown to 78 by 2007. Thanks. --Acntx (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've rated your article as a start class (better late than never ;)). It is fairly short, which is the main reason for the classification, but there are ample references. Keep up the good work!
Grovermj 12:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Granada Bridge (Ormond Beach), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

DYKBot (talk) 14:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove WVYB from Daytona Beach's FM radio list? The station's slogan is "Daytona's Hit Music Station" - Not only that but it's the only A/C Top 40 radio station that has studios in Daytona Beach. Why should the licensing city matter? --eric (mailbox) 09:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look like you've done anything yet on this, so I guess I can still comment. Note that Indian Mound Park redirects to a dab page at Indian Mounds Park, so you should add a link to your article there. Ormond Mound sounds fine for a title. You could also create a redirect at Ormond Indian Mound. -- Donald Albury 00:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of Florida County Roads were former state highways. It's not hard to believe that CR 337 is among them. ----DanTD (talk) 14:43, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so sorry about that, I found the census data for 1910 and 1920 for Seabreeze, Daytona, and Daytona Beach. The census population figures for Seabreeze was 308 in 1910, and 571 in 1920. The census population figures for Daytona was 771 in 1890, 1,690 in 1900, 3,082 in 1910, and 5,445 in 1920. The census population figures for Daytona Beach was 331 in 1910, and 825 in 1920. By adding the three together, the census population figures for Seabreeze, Daytona, and Daytona Beach consolidated together was 771 in 1890, 1,690 in 1900, 3,721 in 1910, and 6,841 in 1920. You can find these census figures here or here

This should be more accurate, this should take care of it. ----OHWiki (talk) 23:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added the rest of the census information for Daytona for 1890 and 1900. There is no census data information for Seabreeze and Daytona Beach for 1890 and 1900. ----OHWiki (talk) 00:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've been recommending a lot of maps by Florida Department of Transportation's Survey and Mapping Department, but I found my share of errors there. On the Hillsborough County map, the extension of County Road 589 is missing. On the Hernando County Map, Cortez Boulevard west of US 19 is mislabeld as County Road 50, when it was actually County Road 550 before I arrived in the state 10 years ago. On the Sumter County Map, Florida State Road 48 goes east of County Road 475 before reaching US 301, when it actually tuns south on Main Street before reaching US 301. The only Marion County map is out of date, and is missing the eastern section, and the Pasco County map leads to Pinellas County. I know I should really report this to the FDOT, but I just thought you should keep this in mind as well. ----DanTD (talk) 11:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Space Coast Area Transit. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. RadioFan (talk) 00:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of fact, I can. I was considering a couple of Florida based bus systems. Now that you have a template, I'll throw this and more in. ----DanTD (talk) 00:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll contribute to this mini-project too. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 01:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• http://www.fl-exchange.com/ - good source of Florida transit info. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 03:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my reply to the note you left on my talk page about LYNX on the Volusia County article public transportation topic. hulmem (talk) 00:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a darn good stub article, one of the best I have seen of that length. I know how annoying it is to have an article deleted. Had that happened to me. Glad you restored it. I've looked for a discussion for deletion but could not find it. Accidental?

Being in the template may not be new, but it would assure me (normally) that the article has permanence. Not much more I can do, other than admire it. You've done a great job. I will be on the lookout for more info. You might ask the guy who put the "othersources" there if he is now willing to remove the tag. I think that is a bit much. Also, by inserting {{Florida stub}}, this should allow you (or someone) to remove the "need more information tag". That is ridiculous for a stub article IMO.

And I am picky! Student7 (talk) 00:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you and your question, we now have a template on transportation in another state where one was lacking. In fact, comparing your article objectively to one I wrote independently, yours is better. Let me know if you run into another snag! Student7 (talk) 00:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

Copyright status of work by the Florida government needs clarification as the Florida government itself prominently displays copyright notices on its various websites. The article Lake George State Forest was listed for investigation for copyright concerns on April 4th. It has now been blanked and listed at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems#Remaining_older_issues.2C_consolidated pending resolution of this matter. Please provide any information you can offer there. I've also requested clarification of this discrepancy at Copyright status of work by the Florida government. I am concerned that you may have misinterpreted "public records" to mean "public domain". These are very different legal concepts. Public records are required by law to be accessible, but that does not mean they may reproduced and modified as public domain documents can. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have also listed Tiger Bay State Forest, though it is at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 April 12 since it had not previously been listed for investigation at WP:CP. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:32, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given the circumstances, I have listed Template:FLGovernment for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

More at my talk. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to update you personally, I've written User:MGodwin about the matter, and we'll see what the Foundation's position on this issue is. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I'm properly awake, I'll let you know (before I forget again) that I answered your note at my talk. I wonder if it wouldn't be just as easy to paste my response here. Talk page maintenance. It's a pickle. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

←Just wanted to let you know that I got a response from Mike, who has been busy at work. The Foundation has no official stance on this, which means that at this point, we're on our own with it. I see the TfD has already closed here, while I was waiting to hear from him. I'll go see what the situation is on Commons and make a note of his response there. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It seems like PD-FLGov debate is never ending.--Elvey (talk) 06:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Might I ask if you have decided to stop working on Wikitravel permanently? If so, could you please tell me why?

Thanks. -- Sapphire (talk) 23:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Permanently" is a very long time, so I should answer "no" for now. Gamweb (talk) 16:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say that I do. Sorry. :( ----DanTD (talk) 04:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have never edited on Wiki before and tried to update the following link on Volusia Roads, but it looked like Chinese to me, so I'm passing on what I have so far so that maybe you can help to do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_county_roads_in_Volusia_County,_Florida

• 1. CR415 – N. Tomoka Farms Rd (Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare)
• 2. CR430 – Mason Avenue (Clyde Morris Blvd – I-95 Dead End) (Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare)
• 3. CR483 – N. Clyde Morris Blvd (Mason Ave – SR40) (Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare)
• 4. CR4001 – Halifax Ave/John Anderson Dr (US92, DB - Beau Rivage Dr, OB)
• 5. CR4009 – Williamson Blvd (Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare)
• 6. CR4011 – N. Beach Street/Riverside Drive/Old Dixie Hwy (Fairview Ave, DB – I-95/Flagler County Line)
• 7. CR4015 – Derbyshire Road
• 8. CR4017 – Jimmy Ann Dr (Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare)
• 9. CR4019 – LPGA Blvd (US92 - Riverside Dr, Holly Hill) (Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare)
• 10. CR4026 – Sixth Street
• 11. CR4027 – Grandview Avenue
• 12. CR4028 – Eighth Street
• 13. CR4029 – Beach Street/Wilder Blvd (Fairview Ave – Wilder/US1)
• 14. CR4035 – Martin Luther King Blvd (MLK)
• 15. CR4037 – Lincoln Street
• 16. CR4039 – White Street
• 17. CR4040 – Main Street/Fairview Ave/George W Engram Blvd/Dunn Ave (Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare)
• 18. CR4042 – University Blvd
• 19. CR4043 – Highland Avenue/Heineman Street
• 20. CR4044 – Third Street
• 21. CR4048 – Madison Avenue (N. Beach St – Heineman St)
• 22. CR4050 – Orange Ave/Silver Beach Ave (A1A - Nova Rd)
• 23. CR4052 – Dr Mary McLeod Bethune Blvd (MMB)
• 24. CR4062 – Belleview Avenue (Clyde Morris – S. Beach Street)
• 25. CR4068 – Belleview Avenue Extension (Tomoka Farms Road – Clyde Morris) (Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare)
• 26. CR4069 – Anastasia Drive
• 27. CR4072 - Big Tree Road
• 28. CR4073 – Palmetto Avenue (Beville Rd/US1 - MMB)

OTHER COUNTY ROADS

• 29. Aviation Center Parkway
• 30. Coral Sea Ave
• 31. Corsair Drive
• 32. Midway Ave
• 33. Richard Petty Blvd
• 34. Fifth Street
• 35. Magnolia Ave (City Island Only to S Beach St)
• 36. CR2803 - John Anderson Dr (Beau Rivage Dr - High Bridge Rd, OB)
• 37. CR4075 - S Atlantic Ave. Continuation of SRA1A south of Dunlawton Bridge (where it exits to mainland) to Ponce Inlet.

Ref Link to verify is County GIS maps which show County Roads: http://maps.vcgov.org/vcmaps/dataviewer.htm Daytona Beach Scenic Thoroughfare Roads: http://library4.municode.com:80/default-test/template.htm?view=browse&doc_action=setdoc&doc_keytype=tocid&doc_key=437f1333d1ac137436c5ecfde313d7c9&infobase=13509 Horus33 (talk) 16:25, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed that List of county roads in Volusia County, Florida, on which you have worked, be deleted. The reason is that it fails to satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements, which would require the topic of county roads in Volusia County to be the subject of significant discussion in reliable independent sources. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:17, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Volusia County Roads has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CR 42 isn't mentioned there, but I did see some other links that describe it as a scenic highway after I found out the article was deleted. Here's one. Other links could've been used as references as well; (1, 2, 3, and other's I can't find right now). I'll keep trying to find more. ----DanTD (talk) 03:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article County Road 4040 (Volusia County, Florida) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable county road. Just because it linked Daytona to another town in the 20s doesn't mean its notable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Admrboltz (talk) 00:34, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I went to the link for Scenic Highways in Volusia County, Florida, but for some reason, it keeps giving me "CODE OF ORDINANCES: City of DADE CITY, FLORIDA." ----DanTD (talk) 01:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might not want to hear this, but the best advice I can give you is to try to see if they were former state roads tied to the Great Florida Renumbering of 1945. I've got some links for you, which you may already know about:

• Blue Diamonds: The Old Florida State Road System
• Florida's Great Renumbering

The fact that these roads connected towns which were eventually acquired by Daytona Beach may be the only thing about them that's notable. If those links don't work, your best bet would be to merge them into the List of county roads in Volusia County, Florida. ----DanTD (talk) 02:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully, that will be good enough. It seems that way. ----DanTD (talk) 02:19, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb/Archive! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in some discussion here about roads in Florida. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2011 January 12. FieldMarine (talk) 07:01, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/H-58 (Michigan county highway).
Message added 23:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

There is no other agenda afoot here Gamweb. You incorrectly processed three articles for deletion apparently trying to make a point as one of your articles was nominated for deletion. AFD is not grounds for tantrums or fights with other editors. If you have an issue with another editor, there are numerous avenues that you can take, such as getting a third opinion, request for comment, or The administrators noticeboard. Don't accuse an uninvolved individual as having an agenda. The articles would have been snowballed closed anyway. I'm also posting this on your talk page. Dusti^*poke* 05:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you had bothered to review the history of the three pages that are falsely "attributed" to me, you would have noticed that I do not have even one edit on any of them. The argument used is inaccurate and irrelevant. Gamweb (talk) 08:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit History of BCR 509

Edit History of BCR 511

Edit History of BCR 516

I actually did, and if you notice the community was clearly against the proposed deletion of the articles. Don't accuse me of not weighing the community's concerns and looking over the situation. You have a conflict of interest in this situation, and therefore need to step back. I support you taking a wikibreak as you have indicated you are doing since you're being "harassed" which I see no instance of. Dusti^*poke* 21:27, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did not use the word harassed, but you did. I used the phrase personal attacks which you are persisting in. What is considered to be a personal attack? Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. You have several times now posted that ...as one of your articles was nominated for deletion. I did not create, do not have any edits in, nor have any association with the three articles that are offered as "evidence" of your accusation. Futhurmore, I do not own any articles on WP (as no other contributor does, either). I find your conduct in this incident to be troubling, as you openly state on your user page that you are seeking promotion to Wikipedia Administrator. I do not support your promotion to be a Wikipedia Administrator. Gamweb (talk) 17:29, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gamweb, I need to comment, if only to get you to understand the situation.Three Michigan articles were nominated for deletion after you were asked to comment on the nominations concerning three Florida articles. That is the connection, not any edit history. Those FL nominations were for redirection/merger not deletion. The nomination rationale for the three MI articles was very faulty, as notability is very clearly established in all three articles. Michigan has tens of thousands of county roads, if not hundreds of thousands. Only 7 have articles. Of those 7, 4 are part of a state-wide system with numbers assigned by the state, 1 (CR 492) contains the first highway centerline in the country, 1 (Brockway Mountain Drive) was built by the Civilian Conservation Corps and is famous for its scenic value and 1 (Forest Highway 16) is mistaken as part of the CDH system on maps. To merge FFH-16 or any of the CDHs back into the list (they were merged once) would unbalance the list, hence the split. Non-notable articles, i.e. articles that don't meet the General Notable Guideline, normally should not have individual articles. A system of CRs in a county is notable, and coverage of the components in a list is appropriate. That's the only "agenda", if you will. Imzadi 1979 → 02:48, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a version of it in my sandbox, but I'm not doen with it yet. There are some aspects of it that I have to write, rewrite., and try to find out if I can get away with describing it in a counter-clockwise direction. ----DanTD (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks pretty good. Although the following line;

"The numbers and routes of all Florida highways are assigned by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), while county road numbers are assigned by the counties, with guidance from FDOT. North-south routes are generally assigned odd numbers, while east-west routes are generally assigned even numbers."

Doesn't necessarily apply to all roads in all counties. Sumter County Road 673, for example is an odd number that runs east-west. I suppose we could leave that line there and point out that there are roads that don't always follow the E/W=even & N/S=odd rules. ----DanTD (talk) 13:27, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Might you know the boundaries for this, specifically? What the NRHP lists is kinda vague. Like, how far south it goes. I hope to get over there in the near future, and it'd help to know, ya see. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 18:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed myself that the NRHP description is rather vague. I can only speculate - "Seabreeze" H.D. is the one furthest to the north, "Surfside" H.D. is directly south of Seabreeze H.D. So - perhaps "South Peninsula" H.D. is directly south of "Surfside" H.D.? I wont know for sure unless I can track down someone from our local Hysterical Commission and ask them directly. :p Gamweb (talk) 02:13, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another possibility about South Peninsula H.D. comes to mind - an episode from local history I remember reading: Around 1924, Daytona Beach (the old, little Daytona Beach, before consolidation) and Port Orange wanted to annex the whole South Beach Peninsula area. The local residents did not want to join either city, instead they wanted to join mainland Daytona. The State Legislature granted the residents their wish, and let the whole of the South Peninsula join Daytona. This is what prompted the consolidation talks in 1925 - Seabreeze, Daytona, and Daytona Beach became one on Jan. 1st, 1926. The new city gobbled up Blake (South Daytona) also (residents of Blake fought the annexation in court and won). The residents of South Peninsula changed their minds and did not want to be part of the consolidated Daytona Beach and the annexation was greatly reduced in size (Daytona Beach Shores and Ponce Inlet were organized almost 40 years later). So perhaps the "South Peninsula H.D." is supposed to represent the entire south peninsula area, that became part of mainland Daytona in 1924? (This is just speculation, of course) Gamweb (talk) 02:29, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Halifax Road is one of the boundaries of the Seabreeze and South Peninsula HDs, so I can start from there. I seem to remember that the HDs are fairly well marked with street signs and banners, so I should be able to muddle thru. Thanks for the history lesson. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 16:18, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is an infobox for highway system articles in the US called {{infobox state highway system}}. I have added it to all of the FL list articles, but you'll need to deploy it to the remaining county road lists. It has the same links on the bottom of the box as will now appear in all Floridian articles using {{infobox road}}. The subtemplate was updated with links to the lists for Interstates, US Highways, State Roads, Pre-1945 State Roads, Toll Roads and the main article on county roads in Florida. We can program the subtemplate at some point to recognize the county name and add a link to the county-specific list. What you've been pasting into the top of lists isn't good because it's a hard-coded infobox. By using the template, your articles will be updated as the template is updated. (It was recently given the same visual facelift as the other roads infoboxes. In the future, the green color bars may change shades, and by using the template, your articles will change to match.) Imzadi 1979 → 21:07, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

County-specific list logic has been added to the subtemplate. Now if a stand-alone CR has an infobox, the list of links at the bottom of that infobox will recognize the county name and link to the county list as well. Imzadi 1979 → 21:13, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen those before. You're right that they're not always accurate. I had to write to FDOT and tell them about many of the errors. Some have been fixed, but others haven't. ----DanTD (talk) 13:44, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's reminiscent of the list of County Roads in Rockland County, New York. That would be an interesting way to reformat the Florida County Road lists, although it might make many of them too big, and would require some splitting. Even if you do it that way, I still would like to make the Ormond Scenic Loop and Trail article seperatley, and if you find more Florida CR lists to make, you should do them. ----DanTD (talk) 18:59, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at The Bushranger's talk page.
Message added 03:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at The Bushranger's talk page.
Message added 04:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

It would be good to state what exactly makes these players "notable". Obviously, they are notable to Wikipedia, but why are they notable members of the team? Are they simple those who have played any games in the majors? Have they won some kind of MLB award (MVP, Cy Young, Rookie of the Year, Silver Slugger, Gold Gloves, etc.)? Were they selected to play in a major league all-star game? Do they hold Daytona baseball records? Whatever the case, it would be best to say why their name is on the list and make sure everyone who meets this criteria is included. NatureBoyMD (talk) 00:48, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I copied them from this category but have not done any further research on them. I figured, since they have their own pages on Wikipedia, they must be considered notable already. Gamweb (talk) 00:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It may be better to just mention that they have all played in the majors at the beginning of the section instead of adding "major league [position]" to each player's name. It looks crowed in my opinion. You could also add an abbreviation of their position after the name (ex. "*Matt Murton, OF"). NatureBoyMD (talk) 01:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did half of them - yes I agree it looks crowded now. I will try your suggestions. Gamweb (talk) 01:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Daytona Cubs at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello, Gamweb, are you okay with the Alt hook that GaryColemanFan wrote? It looks like you implicitly objected, so I didn't want to move the Daytona Cubs DYK into the Prep Area yet unless you were okay with the hook. OCNative (talk) 06:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Daytona Cubs, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that on July 28, 2006, Daytona Cubs baseball player Ryan Harvey set a Florida State League record by hitting four home runs in a game against the Clearwater Threshers? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Gamweb. I will try; let me see if minor league managers have a special infobox, since Bailey has no Major League playing or managing record. ThanksMcGill1974 (talk) 13:06, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

... for your note of some time ago. None caught my eye at the moment, but I'll keep it in mind. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at Navy blue84's talk page.
Message added 15:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

A little late since I replied the other day. --NavyBlue84 15:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noted that you left a message for User:The Bushranger on his talk page. I just thought I'd point out that he has been MIA since 27 March 2011, so you may not get a quick reply from him. - Ahunt (talk) 21:21, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 June 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ukrainian American Veterans, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Ukrainian American Veterans organization placed a memorial plaque at the USS Arizona Memorial in Pearl Harbor, Honolulu, Hawaii, in 1980? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Fort Gadsden, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:DanTD. Thank you. Rschen7754 08:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was no obvious reason in my post that would bring sense into your reply, so I can only conclude about your motive. Gamweb (talk) 12:09, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gamweb, keep the faith. Ignore the comment above. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 15:20, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most of those sources look decent. Add them as you wish. The best things would be sources verifying the anchor changes. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Apparently, you are not entirely clear on "fair use". The use of a logo copyrighted by Michigan State University is only fair use to illustrate an article about Michigan State University, or an article about a program of Michigan State University. It is not fair use to illustrate an article about a high school, even if the high school is "getting away" with using the logo themselves. I am not a lawyer, but it certainly appears the high school is itself making a copyright violation. Some schools (Notre Dame, for one) will aggressively pursue that type of violation. Others not so much. But it doesn't change the fact that MSU's logo is copyrighted by them, and fair use only allows for using copyrighted logos to illustrate articles about the copyright holder. Happy editing! Gtwfan52 (talk) 08:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steinert High School's Logo is illustrated on the school web site here: Hamilton East. You can easily see its identical. I suppose the legal issue is between Michgan State University and Steinert High School, although I can't imagine Michigan suing a public high school over it. I have separated the logos and I have a few other samples of items in my posession that I may be able to use. (I'm a graduate of Steinert, Class of 1980). Gamweb (talk) 08:15, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Steinert High School Logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Gtwfan52 (talk) 08:27, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Logo can be found several times on the Steinert High School web site. I have found it at four separate locations so far. I have a Fair Use Template filled out to companion the Steinert Logo. Gamweb (talk) 08:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One

Two

Three

Four (Reverse Image)

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at Gtwfan52's talk page.
Message added 09:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at Gtwfan52's talk page.
Message added 09:12, 26 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:12, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at Gtwfan52's talk page.
Message added 09:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Already did. Thanks for your hard work to improve Wikipedia! Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:48, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Steinert High School. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At least two different editors have objected to this content. Please stop. See message on article talk page. BTW, reverting that was not vandalism, he gave a good reason in his edit summary. Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:16, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since they are different images, I do not count three reverts. The vandalism/removals was committed by an anonymous I.P. Are you deliberately logging out to perform these acts of vandalism, in order to protect your named account? Gamweb (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are more than welcome to report me. In fact, please do. I will wait for another editor to revert your edit warring. You have been here way too long to be acting this way. Please stop. In the future, if you wish to discuss this, please take it to the article's talk page. Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly have been participating in a discussion on the article's talk page and on your user page. Are you pretending to not be aware of this? Is this passive aggressive behavior on your part? Gamweb (talk) 21:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quit slinging accusations. You are edit warring. See #1 above. I only want the discussion to be in one place for everybody's convenience. I find it tiresome to be going here there and everywhere to communicate with you and was only suggesting a simpler alternative. I have seen and read everything you wrote. Waiting for my SPI notification.... Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:15, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb/Archive. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by NtheP (talk) 22:54, 14 November 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Steinert High School logo.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gamweb. You are invited to join WikiProject Hotels, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of hotels, motels and lodging-related topics. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Steinert High School logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:44, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope somebody has a source for this one. -------User:DanTD (talk) 22:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't find anything there either. I even tried Historic Aerials Online in hopes of coming across an old map with the proposed road but no such luck. Most of the old maps I have are in storage as well, and I'm not sure they cover this road either. -------User:DanTD (talk) 03:13, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you can tell, I rarely check things here. Thanks for the heads-up! Are they filed under "Tampa Yankees" in the Commons, or how would I find them? EaglesPhilliesFanInTampa 15:40, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox historic area2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:04, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Aluma Shield has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Couldn't establish WP:NOTABILITY

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 16:39, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I an on my phone editing right now and due to the restrictions my small phone put on me, I can neither read the newspaper article nor reply on the old thread at the article. However, it is still doubtful that the spartan logo could be used on the steinert article, as its copyright status still has not changed. It is still copyrighted to MSU and it is not a fair use to use it to idenntify Steinert. Steinert has been liscensed to use it. That has no bearing on a third party such as Wikipedia. John from Idegon (talk) 22:18, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And having read the article now, I see nothing in it that would dissuade me from that position. Wikipedia always is on the conservative side of any copyright question; that is to say that if there is any question the answer is no. A license to use it is just that and it has no bearing on a third party like Wikipedia. MSU is still the copyright holder and will be in perpetuity, as long as they keep up their paperwork. With the dollar value of the trademark, that is a forgone conclusion. John from Idegon (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks for your input. Gamweb (talk) 04:59, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]