Still need answers?
They are not urgent, but learning the answers would be useful. Diltsgd 08:27, 2 April 2008 (MDT)
Research process graphic
There are a couple good scanned images of the circle of arrows schematic used in the basic family history research guide, in the files area on the site that were input there on 17 April, that might be useful in the articles on how to do basic research, including the one you edited tonight. They are in the 'File list' link in the 'special pages' area on the site. About six or seven, one is the old DOS FamilySearch and may not be all that useful, but some of the others will be the ones I'm speaking of. JamesAnderson 20:44, 27 April 2008 (MDT)
You da MAN
David, you are THE MAN for adding those flags to state links on the United States page! That is SO COOL! Ritcheymt 02:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Cool application of a portal
David, the work you're doing with the R&C portal is cool. Watching what you put there and seeing the value it adds to the work consultants do with missionaries will inform me as to ways a genealogical society or library might use the wiki. We're interested in creating a value propositions for societies to get involved; I think this portal you've created will feed that value proposition. Ritcheymt 19:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
I like what you've done so far on Maryland History, David. Thanks! As the barn raising winds down, I want to get a feel for how each article on the Maryland Barn Raising Tasks is coming along so I can tell where to allocate any help that contributors can give for a last push. Could you either send me a message by editing my User Discussion page or go to the Maryland Barn Raising Tasks page and update the column on the % of "doneness" the article is at now? Ritcheymt 17:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Editing glitch, two users working concurrently on same page.
Thanks for spotting that glitch where I was trying to do some capitalization fixes and a couple other things that was not supposed to change the link or the look of it, on that Maryland page tonight. Looks like between us we may have found a bug in the software, since given how fast bad data is fixed in Wikipedia, this should not have been a problem with our wiki, but since it has surfaced, maybe we need to both bring it out next week at user group meeting (hopefully things will go better there next week). JamesAnderson 04:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)