Yes someone can fix that and then tomorrow someone else can insert another ambiguous link. When you left your message on 21 June there were 4 ambiguous links including
American president, i fixed them but more ambiguous links have been added since i fixed all of them,
Tom B (
talk)
00:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)reply
thought i'd replied here but maybe i did it on main talk page. fixed them as you asked including one for geoffrey robinson, i think the disambig tool says - i'm having trouble accessing - there's still an ambiguous robinson link but i can't find it anywhere,
Tom B (
talk)
17:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)reply
I am not enthused about the image placement, but I can live with it.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 02:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC) I have removed one picture, is it better? It is not easy spreading the pictures out andkeeping the pictures relative to the text. (
Off2riorob (
talk)
11:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC))reply
Could the bulleted text be converted to prose. Done
Could the styles section be converted to prose. It could say something like Until YYYY, Brown was referred to as XXX1. Upon completion of his X degree on MM DD, YYYY,[citation #] his title became XXX2. In YYYY, he assumed the title of XXX3 upon such and such occurrence.[citation #] etc.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
14:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Could you post a link to the peer reviewer tool? I've tried "checklinks" and "reflinks", which filled in some gaps, but probably not the gaps you're wanting filled ;-) Cheers,
TFOWRThis flag once was red10:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)reply
I see that many of these have been corrected. However, some citations follow alphanumeric characters. E.G., in the
WP:LEAD see "Brown has a PhD in history[2]". All citations should follow a punctuation mark such as ,.?!)]"';: etc.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
13:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Ah, got it - I hadn't realised refs mid sentence were bad. Fixed now. I'd managed to completely miss the Leonard Figg one, not sure how. Also fixed. Done another "."-search in Firefox, and manually scanned for refs mid sentence. I don't suppose there's a tool to check this stuff? Cheers,
TFOWRThis flag once was red18:24, 18 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Should now be fixed. I used Firefox's "find-as-you-type" function to search for " ," and " .". I also searched for fullstops and commas to check that refs or spaces followed them. Cheers,
TFOWRThis flag once was red13:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)reply
...and that's it! All done. This is the first time I've done
WP:ALT text in many a long year, and never on Wikipedia, so if someone could double-check my work I'd appreciate it. I'm still looking for a solution to the infobox portrait issue listed above, too. Cheers,
TFOWRThis flag once was red11:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Both the disambiguation checker and the links checker above are showing new problems. I would like to say that at whatever time I approve retention of the quality rating that the links were taken care of. Thus, I would like someone to fix the new problems that have popped up.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
02:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Tom, this is a very good article and I am having trouble convincing myself one way or the other. Do you have any commentary on the other comments that you have not addressed.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
04:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)reply
thanks, yes i've added some comments. it's pretty good article. as he's become PM since it was promoted it is harder to maintain and proseline tends to get added. i'd only generally demote if you're sure an article is clearly below other GAs, in order to avoid bureaucracy of demotion then repromotion, plus Off2riorob maybe able to make some headway here,
Tom B (
talk)
17:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Hi, I missed this, I would have liked to help. The article is currently locked down with a little edit dispute over the detail in the lede. When the article is unlocked I would be available to address these small concerns.
Off2riorob (
talk21:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC))reply
Yes please this would be very good - see comments above. some should be easy to fix like the images and punctuation. the harder thing is to get a neutral, flowing article without loads of one-line paragraphs detailing the latest news, thanks very much i'll come back when i can
Tom B (
talk)
17:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Politician articles are hard because some supporters will try to cover up relevant information that is not completely favorable. Some may even try to get the good article award revoked, as could be the case here (or it is a coincidence)
Calmano (
talk)
04:35, 17 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Yes someone can fix that and then tomorrow someone else can insert another ambiguous link. When you left your message on 21 June there were 4 ambiguous links including
American president, i fixed them but more ambiguous links have been added since i fixed all of them,
Tom B (
talk)
00:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)reply
thought i'd replied here but maybe i did it on main talk page. fixed them as you asked including one for geoffrey robinson, i think the disambig tool says - i'm having trouble accessing - there's still an ambiguous robinson link but i can't find it anywhere,
Tom B (
talk)
17:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)reply
I am not enthused about the image placement, but I can live with it.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 02:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC) I have removed one picture, is it better? It is not easy spreading the pictures out andkeeping the pictures relative to the text. (
Off2riorob (
talk)
11:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC))reply
Could the bulleted text be converted to prose. Done
Could the styles section be converted to prose. It could say something like Until YYYY, Brown was referred to as XXX1. Upon completion of his X degree on MM DD, YYYY,[citation #] his title became XXX2. In YYYY, he assumed the title of XXX3 upon such and such occurrence.[citation #] etc.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
14:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Could you post a link to the peer reviewer tool? I've tried "checklinks" and "reflinks", which filled in some gaps, but probably not the gaps you're wanting filled ;-) Cheers,
TFOWRThis flag once was red10:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)reply
I see that many of these have been corrected. However, some citations follow alphanumeric characters. E.G., in the
WP:LEAD see "Brown has a PhD in history[2]". All citations should follow a punctuation mark such as ,.?!)]"';: etc.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
13:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Ah, got it - I hadn't realised refs mid sentence were bad. Fixed now. I'd managed to completely miss the Leonard Figg one, not sure how. Also fixed. Done another "."-search in Firefox, and manually scanned for refs mid sentence. I don't suppose there's a tool to check this stuff? Cheers,
TFOWRThis flag once was red18:24, 18 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Should now be fixed. I used Firefox's "find-as-you-type" function to search for " ," and " .". I also searched for fullstops and commas to check that refs or spaces followed them. Cheers,
TFOWRThis flag once was red13:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)reply
...and that's it! All done. This is the first time I've done
WP:ALT text in many a long year, and never on Wikipedia, so if someone could double-check my work I'd appreciate it. I'm still looking for a solution to the infobox portrait issue listed above, too. Cheers,
TFOWRThis flag once was red11:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Both the disambiguation checker and the links checker above are showing new problems. I would like to say that at whatever time I approve retention of the quality rating that the links were taken care of. Thus, I would like someone to fix the new problems that have popped up.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
02:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Tom, this is a very good article and I am having trouble convincing myself one way or the other. Do you have any commentary on the other comments that you have not addressed.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
04:15, 5 July 2009 (UTC)reply
thanks, yes i've added some comments. it's pretty good article. as he's become PM since it was promoted it is harder to maintain and proseline tends to get added. i'd only generally demote if you're sure an article is clearly below other GAs, in order to avoid bureaucracy of demotion then repromotion, plus Off2riorob maybe able to make some headway here,
Tom B (
talk)
17:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Hi, I missed this, I would have liked to help. The article is currently locked down with a little edit dispute over the detail in the lede. When the article is unlocked I would be available to address these small concerns.
Off2riorob (
talk21:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC))reply
Yes please this would be very good - see comments above. some should be easy to fix like the images and punctuation. the harder thing is to get a neutral, flowing article without loads of one-line paragraphs detailing the latest news, thanks very much i'll come back when i can
Tom B (
talk)
17:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Politician articles are hard because some supporters will try to cover up relevant information that is not completely favorable. Some may even try to get the good article award revoked, as could be the case here (or it is a coincidence)
Calmano (
talk)
04:35, 17 July 2009 (UTC)reply