You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.
Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.
I hope you like this place--I sure do--and want to
stay. If you need help on how to title new articles check out
Wikipedia:Naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the
manual of style. If you need help look at
Wikipedia:Help and
The FAQ , plus if you can't find your answer there, check
The Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or
The Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the
Tutorial and
Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the
Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on
My User talk Page.
Additional tips:
Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!
Happy Wiki-ing. -- John Fader 18:43, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Welcome also to Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics. Feel free to add your name to the list of participants there. Its talk page is also a good resource and a board to ask questions.
Thank you for your contributions to Nullity. Oleg Alexandrov 16:43, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
You did it exactly right. Thanks! — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:46, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
I made a basic user page for you. I hope you don't mind. Nice to meet you by the way, my name is Guardian of Light and I'm also a member of Wikipedia: WikiProject Mathematics.
Guardian of Light 8 July 2005 16:46 (UTC)
Hey Fieari, good editing at Perverted Justice. You've made it flow a lot better. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 00:14, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
Hello! I made note of this on the FAC discussion for DualDisc, but I thought I'd tell you here as well. The ASCII art has been replaced with an actual image. Cheers! -- K1vsr ( talk) 18:31, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
All of your additional points have now been addressed. Thanks for the constructive criticism. It has definitely made the article better. Cheers! -- K1vsr ( talk) 15:10, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
I replied to your question at talk:hummingbird.
You showed support for
Gaming Collaboration of the week. This week Wikipedia:Gaming Collaboration of the week/current was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help. |
Grumpy Troll (talk) 03:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC).
Hey Fieari. Thanks for all your feedback on the article. The nomination failed the first time around, but I have re-submitted it as an FAC. I was wondering if you'd consider supporting it this time around? Cheers! -- K1vsr ( talk) 15:40, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
It seems that the bot finds any word that has a comment after it a misspelling. Might want to find a way to exclude that. Fieari 22:36, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
I've attempted to fix all your objections. Let me know if you have any more, or please update your vote. Thanks. — BRIAN 0918 • 2005-11-20 22:05
I've extended the Initial section so it reads more as a summary of the whole article. -- Barberio 00:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Spikebrennan 22:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC) noticed your comment on the Mao (game) talk page. What were your rules?
I've made several changes that I hope answer your objections to this article as a fac. Pinkville 14:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
All issues have been addressed. I look forward to your support. :) -- Jayzel68 04:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
== Parapsychology is a strange puppy== Emotions flare easily. I have found from past experience (See Constantine the Great) unless there is an immediate reference; material is deleted without hesitation. Even at that if the material upsets the reader it will still be deleted. If you look at my user page you will see I have a knack for upsetting people who have skimmed over things to get a happy answer. I try not to do that. I was once challenged on the amount of reference books written by Milbourne Christopher on parapsycholgy. I was told it was unfair to have more than one. User:Kazuba 15 Feb 2006
I've added a new section that I believe address your concerns -- Jayzel68 22:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
It's still nominated, but for some reason it was moved to the archive. I don't know how to challege this move. Perhaps if you gave support to it it would help. -- Jayzel68 23:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Just wondering what it is about Esperanto that led you to taking a stand against it on your personal page? I can understand either being interested or not... but actively stating that you're opposed puzzles me a little.
Waitak 08:31, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
A lot's changed since your original comments. I've added a much more detailed history section and almost ten references, as well as changing the reference format to the newer "Cite.php" markup. Would you please reevaluate and/or change your vote?-- naryathegreat | (talk) 05:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Similarly with the above, I have removed the reference of Brian Osaughnessey's website, as well as Serena Dawn, and Fortunecity. Is there anything else requiring changing? KILO-LIMA 13:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Oops sorry my bad! Yeah sure take it out. I just ran into it vis-a-vis your article while researching on the Michael Cook AfD and threw it in, sorry, wasn't thinking. Herostratus 21:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Fieari! I sincerely appreciate the sentiment. :-)
Hi Fieari,
No need to apologize, I was not offended. No, really. ;-) I was a tad annoyed, after I saw the comments to two others, but I quite understand. You're passionate about the redesign, and passionate in defending it. Sincerity and ardor are good things—I only make the case that temperance can be a good thing also. ;-) But things are looking good for the redesigned version, and I daresay it will pass! On that cheery note, see you around the wiki, Fieari — Encephalon 04:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know: I have changed my vote to support. Thank You for informing me about the recent developments on the main page redesign. -- S iva1979 Talk to me 15:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks much for reviewing the Judaism and Natural disaster pages for the WP:GA list. Funny how paths can cross multiple times. I think we crossed paths last week on the main page redesign. I commented to you in the Common_objections string about an option to drop rule lines around the featured boxes (with example). Cheers, Vir 20:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Many thanks for your thorough and helpful comments at
WP:FAC. If you would be so good as to strike through any of the objections that I have subsequently met, I would appreciate it, since it helps to keep track of what needs to be done.
Kaisershatner
17:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I made the revisions on the FAC and I would appreciate it if you could return to your entry and change your vote on the FAC. Jtmichcock 16:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC) I did the revisions on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Michigan State University per your request with the addition of cites in the referenced paragraphs. Jtmichcock 18:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, you objected to the The Simpsons FAC on grounds of missing reference section, please note that this has now been fixed. Poulsen 18:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Minor Oppose - Not for the reasons above, but rather, I'm a stickler for WP:LEAD sections to be of the appropriate size. In this case, it should be three paragraphs. I'd support otherwise. Fieari 21:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Fieari. Would you mind withdrawing your featured picture candidate, Image:Dollarbill4.jpg? It will surely not be promoted, and we'd like to try to reduce the number of currently active nominations. If you choose to withdraw it, please move the nomination into the Nominations older than 14 days, the maximum voting period, decision time! section at the bottom and leave a note. Thanks! ~ MDD 46 96 15:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
With the images now fixed, I wondered if you could look over the article again. Soo 10:39, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Do you think you could look over Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Music of the United States again? I've made the image switch you suggested, and some trimming has been done on the article, though with some minor additions the total size hasn't gone down. Tuf-Kat 00:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for defending against various POVish editors, I haven't really noticed your notes until now as from a single user (bigger problems you see) and I just wanted to thank you for your efforts. I noticed your current position in the debate is Neutral and I was wondering if that had changed either, or if you had any comments to improve the article. Thanks again and cheers, H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 19:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Tetra.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ReyBrujo 04:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey Fieari, I'm looking at merging Game tree and Extensive form game. You contributed a section to Game tree that describes the backwards induction algorithm for solving extensive form games. Do you have a reference for this? It would be really useful since backwards induction doesn't always work in extensive form games and it makes me wonder if the two articles ought not to be merged. Perhaps the two come from different traditions and really need to be made more clearly distinct from each other. Pete.Hurd 14:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I believe that all your objections have been addressed for FAC for Alpha Phi Alpha, and a massive copyedit has been performed by a neutral contributor. Can you review the article and cross out the objections that have been resolved? thanks for your time and valuable input. Ccson 03:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Raul has removed the article from FAC, however; hopefully all your concerns have been addressed. Can you strike thru the corrections on the subpage so that we can resolve your issues before renominating the article in about 1 week? Ccson 17:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Hey there, Fieari. Could you do do me a favour? I notice that you have been doing some good work on FAC, and I was wondering if you would take a quick look at " We Belong Together". It has failed a couple of FACs, and I think that it may be ready soon. However, I want to make sure that it will succeed this time, and currently, Peer Review isn't that much help. It would be appreciated. Thanx. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 03:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Made changes to correct problems you brought up. Let me know of any other issues. Thanks. Tombseye 09:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
I replied on the featured article nomination for rapping. I plan on implementing your suggestions. Thanks, -- Urthogie 08:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
I replied to your comment, hope I solved the problem. H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 08:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I wonder if you might clarify your position on Talk:George W. Bush military service controversy? It's helpful to get more specific commentary with a NPOV tag than the general claim that an article is slanted. Otherwise, we're not sure how to go about fixing it. In other words, the bias that is obvious to you, may not be to others; so being more specific would help us clear it up. Thanks. Derex 23:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
It's a minor issue at best, the AKA. Let's not edit war and warn over such things, come to an agreement. Te ke 03:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
A couple months ago, you commented on FAC that the article "Controversies about the Boy Scouts of America" seemed too Anti-BSA in its POV. Since that time, we've done a lot of work on it to try implement the suggestions you've made. We changed the title of the article to Boy Scouts of America membership controversies so as to focus on the membership controvery, so that the article doesn't become a clearhouse of BSA criticism. In line with that, we've moved criticism of BSA over other issues into other articles. We've also done more research on Support for the BSA, and added alot of quotes from its supporters.
We're thinking of putting it up on FAC again, but since you're already familiar with it, would you take a look and see if you can spot ways it still needs to be improved and maybe see if you think we've addressed your earlier concerns? -- Alecmconroy 05:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Fieari, thank you SO much for doing all the "Fact" tags-- it's so helpful to have a fresh set of eyes. We've spent today doing a whirl-wind sourcing campaign. We've filled in all the references you asked for and filled in quite a few you didn't ask for-- we've almost doubt the total number of references. Could you take [[
another look at the article and see if you see any more holes or anything else we should address before trying FAC? Also, let us know what you think about the images we've added. --
Alecmconroy
07:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Just FYI, we've put the BSA article up for FAC. So, drop on by the discussion and add your two cents, if ya want. :) -- Alecmconroy 07:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment. Large scale modifications have taken place since you made it. For more details, please refer to the link above, and to the article itself. :NikoSilver: 12:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I was about to post that in the FAC talk, but I guess it better stays between us:
Please reconsider. :NikoSilver: 21:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. :-) :NikoSilver: 01:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Well now I feel guilty for not noticing you were gone for a month. =) Glad you're back. The effort to get Xavier's birth name in the article appears to have died down, fortunately. No one has yet presented an argument about why it's relevant beyond the simple fact that it's true, and no one ever made an effort to adjust the wording ("aka" being misleading given that no one calls him that). Considering all that, it's easy to maintain the minimal level of civility. =) Powers 20:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Any chance of revisting it? We've done some work on it since you last checked and Peta is no longer opposing. Cheers, Yomangani 13:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I have added some to the lead of this per your suggesion. Thanks for helping. If you feel more lead is needed, please advise what you feel is missing. Thanks. Rlevse 18:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.
Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.
I hope you like this place--I sure do--and want to
stay. If you need help on how to title new articles check out
Wikipedia:Naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the
manual of style. If you need help look at
Wikipedia:Help and
The FAQ , plus if you can't find your answer there, check
The Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or
The Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the
Tutorial and
Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the
Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on
My User talk Page.
Additional tips:
Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!
Happy Wiki-ing. -- John Fader 18:43, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Welcome also to Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics. Feel free to add your name to the list of participants there. Its talk page is also a good resource and a board to ask questions.
Thank you for your contributions to Nullity. Oleg Alexandrov 16:43, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
You did it exactly right. Thanks! — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:46, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
I made a basic user page for you. I hope you don't mind. Nice to meet you by the way, my name is Guardian of Light and I'm also a member of Wikipedia: WikiProject Mathematics.
Guardian of Light 8 July 2005 16:46 (UTC)
Hey Fieari, good editing at Perverted Justice. You've made it flow a lot better. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 00:14, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
Hello! I made note of this on the FAC discussion for DualDisc, but I thought I'd tell you here as well. The ASCII art has been replaced with an actual image. Cheers! -- K1vsr ( talk) 18:31, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
All of your additional points have now been addressed. Thanks for the constructive criticism. It has definitely made the article better. Cheers! -- K1vsr ( talk) 15:10, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
I replied to your question at talk:hummingbird.
You showed support for
Gaming Collaboration of the week. This week Wikipedia:Gaming Collaboration of the week/current was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help. |
Grumpy Troll (talk) 03:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC).
Hey Fieari. Thanks for all your feedback on the article. The nomination failed the first time around, but I have re-submitted it as an FAC. I was wondering if you'd consider supporting it this time around? Cheers! -- K1vsr ( talk) 15:40, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
It seems that the bot finds any word that has a comment after it a misspelling. Might want to find a way to exclude that. Fieari 22:36, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
I've attempted to fix all your objections. Let me know if you have any more, or please update your vote. Thanks. — BRIAN 0918 • 2005-11-20 22:05
I've extended the Initial section so it reads more as a summary of the whole article. -- Barberio 00:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Spikebrennan 22:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC) noticed your comment on the Mao (game) talk page. What were your rules?
I've made several changes that I hope answer your objections to this article as a fac. Pinkville 14:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
All issues have been addressed. I look forward to your support. :) -- Jayzel68 04:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
== Parapsychology is a strange puppy== Emotions flare easily. I have found from past experience (See Constantine the Great) unless there is an immediate reference; material is deleted without hesitation. Even at that if the material upsets the reader it will still be deleted. If you look at my user page you will see I have a knack for upsetting people who have skimmed over things to get a happy answer. I try not to do that. I was once challenged on the amount of reference books written by Milbourne Christopher on parapsycholgy. I was told it was unfair to have more than one. User:Kazuba 15 Feb 2006
I've added a new section that I believe address your concerns -- Jayzel68 22:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
It's still nominated, but for some reason it was moved to the archive. I don't know how to challege this move. Perhaps if you gave support to it it would help. -- Jayzel68 23:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Just wondering what it is about Esperanto that led you to taking a stand against it on your personal page? I can understand either being interested or not... but actively stating that you're opposed puzzles me a little.
Waitak 08:31, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
A lot's changed since your original comments. I've added a much more detailed history section and almost ten references, as well as changing the reference format to the newer "Cite.php" markup. Would you please reevaluate and/or change your vote?-- naryathegreat | (talk) 05:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Similarly with the above, I have removed the reference of Brian Osaughnessey's website, as well as Serena Dawn, and Fortunecity. Is there anything else requiring changing? KILO-LIMA 13:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Oops sorry my bad! Yeah sure take it out. I just ran into it vis-a-vis your article while researching on the Michael Cook AfD and threw it in, sorry, wasn't thinking. Herostratus 21:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Fieari! I sincerely appreciate the sentiment. :-)
Hi Fieari,
No need to apologize, I was not offended. No, really. ;-) I was a tad annoyed, after I saw the comments to two others, but I quite understand. You're passionate about the redesign, and passionate in defending it. Sincerity and ardor are good things—I only make the case that temperance can be a good thing also. ;-) But things are looking good for the redesigned version, and I daresay it will pass! On that cheery note, see you around the wiki, Fieari — Encephalon 04:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know: I have changed my vote to support. Thank You for informing me about the recent developments on the main page redesign. -- S iva1979 Talk to me 15:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks much for reviewing the Judaism and Natural disaster pages for the WP:GA list. Funny how paths can cross multiple times. I think we crossed paths last week on the main page redesign. I commented to you in the Common_objections string about an option to drop rule lines around the featured boxes (with example). Cheers, Vir 20:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Many thanks for your thorough and helpful comments at
WP:FAC. If you would be so good as to strike through any of the objections that I have subsequently met, I would appreciate it, since it helps to keep track of what needs to be done.
Kaisershatner
17:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I made the revisions on the FAC and I would appreciate it if you could return to your entry and change your vote on the FAC. Jtmichcock 16:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC) I did the revisions on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Michigan State University per your request with the addition of cites in the referenced paragraphs. Jtmichcock 18:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, you objected to the The Simpsons FAC on grounds of missing reference section, please note that this has now been fixed. Poulsen 18:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Minor Oppose - Not for the reasons above, but rather, I'm a stickler for WP:LEAD sections to be of the appropriate size. In this case, it should be three paragraphs. I'd support otherwise. Fieari 21:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Fieari. Would you mind withdrawing your featured picture candidate, Image:Dollarbill4.jpg? It will surely not be promoted, and we'd like to try to reduce the number of currently active nominations. If you choose to withdraw it, please move the nomination into the Nominations older than 14 days, the maximum voting period, decision time! section at the bottom and leave a note. Thanks! ~ MDD 46 96 15:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
With the images now fixed, I wondered if you could look over the article again. Soo 10:39, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Do you think you could look over Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Music of the United States again? I've made the image switch you suggested, and some trimming has been done on the article, though with some minor additions the total size hasn't gone down. Tuf-Kat 00:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for defending against various POVish editors, I haven't really noticed your notes until now as from a single user (bigger problems you see) and I just wanted to thank you for your efforts. I noticed your current position in the debate is Neutral and I was wondering if that had changed either, or if you had any comments to improve the article. Thanks again and cheers, H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 19:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Tetra.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{ GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{ Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ReyBrujo 04:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey Fieari, I'm looking at merging Game tree and Extensive form game. You contributed a section to Game tree that describes the backwards induction algorithm for solving extensive form games. Do you have a reference for this? It would be really useful since backwards induction doesn't always work in extensive form games and it makes me wonder if the two articles ought not to be merged. Perhaps the two come from different traditions and really need to be made more clearly distinct from each other. Pete.Hurd 14:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I believe that all your objections have been addressed for FAC for Alpha Phi Alpha, and a massive copyedit has been performed by a neutral contributor. Can you review the article and cross out the objections that have been resolved? thanks for your time and valuable input. Ccson 03:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Raul has removed the article from FAC, however; hopefully all your concerns have been addressed. Can you strike thru the corrections on the subpage so that we can resolve your issues before renominating the article in about 1 week? Ccson 17:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Hey there, Fieari. Could you do do me a favour? I notice that you have been doing some good work on FAC, and I was wondering if you would take a quick look at " We Belong Together". It has failed a couple of FACs, and I think that it may be ready soon. However, I want to make sure that it will succeed this time, and currently, Peer Review isn't that much help. It would be appreciated. Thanx. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 03:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Made changes to correct problems you brought up. Let me know of any other issues. Thanks. Tombseye 09:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
I replied on the featured article nomination for rapping. I plan on implementing your suggestions. Thanks, -- Urthogie 08:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
I replied to your comment, hope I solved the problem. H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 08:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I wonder if you might clarify your position on Talk:George W. Bush military service controversy? It's helpful to get more specific commentary with a NPOV tag than the general claim that an article is slanted. Otherwise, we're not sure how to go about fixing it. In other words, the bias that is obvious to you, may not be to others; so being more specific would help us clear it up. Thanks. Derex 23:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
It's a minor issue at best, the AKA. Let's not edit war and warn over such things, come to an agreement. Te ke 03:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
A couple months ago, you commented on FAC that the article "Controversies about the Boy Scouts of America" seemed too Anti-BSA in its POV. Since that time, we've done a lot of work on it to try implement the suggestions you've made. We changed the title of the article to Boy Scouts of America membership controversies so as to focus on the membership controvery, so that the article doesn't become a clearhouse of BSA criticism. In line with that, we've moved criticism of BSA over other issues into other articles. We've also done more research on Support for the BSA, and added alot of quotes from its supporters.
We're thinking of putting it up on FAC again, but since you're already familiar with it, would you take a look and see if you can spot ways it still needs to be improved and maybe see if you think we've addressed your earlier concerns? -- Alecmconroy 05:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Fieari, thank you SO much for doing all the "Fact" tags-- it's so helpful to have a fresh set of eyes. We've spent today doing a whirl-wind sourcing campaign. We've filled in all the references you asked for and filled in quite a few you didn't ask for-- we've almost doubt the total number of references. Could you take [[
another look at the article and see if you see any more holes or anything else we should address before trying FAC? Also, let us know what you think about the images we've added. --
Alecmconroy
07:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Just FYI, we've put the BSA article up for FAC. So, drop on by the discussion and add your two cents, if ya want. :) -- Alecmconroy 07:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment. Large scale modifications have taken place since you made it. For more details, please refer to the link above, and to the article itself. :NikoSilver: 12:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I was about to post that in the FAC talk, but I guess it better stays between us:
Please reconsider. :NikoSilver: 21:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. :-) :NikoSilver: 01:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Well now I feel guilty for not noticing you were gone for a month. =) Glad you're back. The effort to get Xavier's birth name in the article appears to have died down, fortunately. No one has yet presented an argument about why it's relevant beyond the simple fact that it's true, and no one ever made an effort to adjust the wording ("aka" being misleading given that no one calls him that). Considering all that, it's easy to maintain the minimal level of civility. =) Powers 20:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Any chance of revisting it? We've done some work on it since you last checked and Peta is no longer opposing. Cheers, Yomangani 13:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I have added some to the lead of this per your suggesion. Thanks for helping. If you feel more lead is needed, please advise what you feel is missing. Thanks. Rlevse 18:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)