Talk:Elliott Cutoff

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elliott Cutoff article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

United States: Old West Stub‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Stub	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject American Old West (assessed as Low-importance).

Rating[edit]

Hello! Just noting that I've now rated this page as C-class, given that it's clearly been expanded beyond a stub. It's also close to being B-class, but needs some adjustment in terms of tone and neutrality. It could also use some expansion in terms of modern times: what happened after about 1860? Once that expansion is done, you might find that the history section is a bit detailed, but for now it works. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 04:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I started this article but because so much of the expansion has been cited with references I can't check, I haven't been working on it. I'm curious why you're doing the eval for WP:ORE, usually we rate our own articles. Not that there's a rule against someone else doing it, just curious. Usually if I see another project's article has been expanded beyond a stub, I just remove "stub" from the class field and let the project handle it. That said, I don't really do assessments, but I think I agree with yours. I've also listed this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Oregon/Assessment--in some ways we are tougher and more specific than other projects. Valfontis (talk) 16:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ETA (edited to add) Oh, I see, User:Lostwagonman left a note on your talk page. Good for you for communicating with your fellow Wikipedians, LWM. I was curious why you hadn't contacted WikiProject Oregon. Valfontis (talk) 16:37, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Valfontis I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia and was not sure who rated articles. It had not been rated since being a stub, but now I know you are involved with WikiProject Oregon. I appreciate any helpful comments. Let me know how I can improve it.LWM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lostwagonman (talk • contribs) 5:22, March 7, 2011

File:Elijah Elliott.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Elijah Elliott.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elliott Cutoff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101206223110/http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/358.html to http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/358.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:53, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]