![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
Moving discussion to User:Happyme22/admin coaching---add that page to your watchlist. Balloonman ( talk) 19:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Although I'm taking a break from doing full GA reviews of articles, I'm trying to give some general feedback to nominators. This article looks pretty good, and it would be a great one to get to the GA level. My biggest conern was the end of the "Tower Commission" section. There is no citation for the quotations about placing the blame on Reagan. I'm assuming that this was an oversight since the rest of the article is well referenced, but it's pretty important to have a source for the claim about Reagan's responsibility. In the "Convictions, pardons, and reinstatements" section, the first two paragraphs also need thorough referencing. Best wishes with the review, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 20:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Just a heads up on Daimerej, an editor who popped up in the midst of the dispute over Jeremiah Wright's controversy page. It appears that this user is Ewness on a different computer. He has the same disruptive attitude, same behavior on the talk page of an article he started, makes the same edits on the Trinity United Church of Christ page, and talks about the talk page without ever having posted on it...besides as Ewness. Trilemma ( talk) 12:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
-- BorgQueen ( talk) 15:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry (really). I'm not trying to be contentious. For what it's worth -- I absolutely agreed with all of your other edits that changed the boosterism to neutral language. And I added in a couple more reliable sources that support that the talk is about him being the Obama's VP. If you still disagree, I'm more than open to discussion. ∴ Therefore | talk 22:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
User:Stephen_Ewen: I think this is the good hand account. He appears to be the writer attributed at the bottom of the Trinity article. the info at citizdium that it links to is identicale to the old info on one of the socks of Cyber. I am not good at providing links/ diffs. but if you would look into it and let me know what you think I'd be gratified. Funny how User:Ewenss is very similar to Stephen Ewen; his linked profile shows that he spent time in Micronesia and cm jones, an identified sock spent several years editing Saipan Sucks article here. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Stephen_Ewen/Scratch_Pad4 and its side bar shows a similiar editing style to User:Ewenss and his side bar usage in the Trinity article .Anyhoo. I like the balance you've brought to this project and the Ronald Regan article is awesome.-- Die4Dixie ( talk) 06:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Unindent> No, Citizendium is not a Wikipedia related site. Please see below. Die4Dixie ( talk) 20:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
User talk:Tiptoety. Please see this talk page as some of the info might bear a bearing on the TUCC page where I believe that ewenss/ cyberanth, et. al. have abused the system to publish original research. Die4Dixie ( talk) 20:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Think nothing of the Jimmy Carter thing. I didn't think you would do that. It seemed strange at the time.
Best wishes. Jimmuldrow ( talk) 22:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
This post is out of character, hence my question. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 08:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Regarding your comment in the AfD for Lil' Wil -- The singer has charted on at least two Billboard charts, as verified here. A charted single is almost always an assertation of notability, and I have no reason to believe otherwise. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 01:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I think the other way is the correct usage. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not really a 'fan' of the Bush family (for obvious reasons), but it's interesting that you met her in person. I wonder if she knows of the Wikipedia article? — Wackymacs ( talk ~ edits) 22:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
War has erupted on the Obama page... AGAIN. Also, Admin couching, I look forward to your run, you have my vote. ;-)— Realist2 ( Come Speak To Me) 01:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
FWIW, Happyme22, I've an identical discussion going on
here (Ooops!)
here.
— Justmeherenow
( )
06:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, i sent you an email, hope it didnt go in your spam box, im having a lot of trouble with that recently lol. --— Realist2 ( Come Speak To Me) 04:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I hope you're doing well, and thanks again for helping out with the McCain article. A small quibble, though. Aren't images of people supposed to show them facing into the text of the article, rather than away from it? Ferrylodge ( talk) 04:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I am a master student at the Institute of Technology Management, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan. Currently I am wrapping up my master thesis titled “Can Wikipedia be used for knowledge service?” In order to validate the knowledge evolution maps of identified users in Wikipedia, I need your help. I have generated a knowledge evolution map to denote your knowledge activities in Wikipedia according to your inputs including the creation and modification of contents in Wikipedia, and I need you to validate whether the generated knowledge evolution map matches the knowledge that you perceive you own it. Could you please do me a favor?
The deadline of my thesis defense is set by the end of June, 2008. There is no much time left for me to wrap up the thesis. If you can help me, please reply this message. I will send you the URL link of the first part once I receive your response. The completion of my thesis heavily relies much on your generous help.
Sincerely
JnW talk 13:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Improvements have been made to Ali Faik Zaghloul and extensive dialoge on the notablity have occurred at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ali Faik Zaghloul would you like to reconsider your "Delete" vote? Jeepday ( talk) 22:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I think you should reconsider the GA status of this article since significant portions have been blanked. Thank you.-- William Saturn ( talk) 17:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello. In light of the fact that it is the first book the U.S. government ever went to court to censor before its publication(!), I was hoping you could help improve the The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence article as part of an effort to make it worthy of becoming a [[Wikipedia:F<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href=" http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Lupin/navpop.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css&dontcountme=s">eatured article candidates|featured article candidate]]? -- Loremaster ( talk) 14:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Ive implimented most of your suggestions since you copy edited it about 6 weeks ago. Would you mind taking a look & possibly giving some feedback. I dont expect a full copy edit off you if you dont have the time lol. You have gone out of your way too much for me already. However I respect your work and the MJ lead you did has received some rave reviews. Whatever time you can give from your scedule is appreciated. Regards — Realist2 ( Come Speak To Me) 04:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Did you receive it? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Quick question. I've been asked what the WP:GAU survey meant, and I replied that pretty much everyone either wanted feedback on the article in question or else seemed reasonably happy to be participating in the process. I see you've got at least 7 GAs under your belt; can I interpret that to mean you're reasonably happy with the GA process? (Feel free to reply here) - Dan Dank55 ( talk)( mistakes) 00:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted that, Hap. I think yoou need to have some discussion regarding such, and the protocol can be found at WP:MERGE. First you propose merging and then, if you find a consensus for such, do you perform the merge. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 02:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Happyme22, have a look at your issues within the Cold War's FAC! I've updated them today and all seems to be resolved. Best, -- Eurocopter ( talk) 17:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Doesn't this seem kinda short for GA? I think it's well sourced and all, but surely there's more to say about her. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Have a good one, Hap. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 01:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
I added your article to the queue for the next update [3], but you then returned it to the nomination page. Did you not want it to be used on the main page? Nominations are moved to the next update queue when they are selected for use. -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 03:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
-- BorgQueen ( talk) 12:17, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
hello, I was wondering if you would be interested in giving the article Janet Jackson a copy-edit? Also, I've been working on Batgirl ( current FAC), Batwoman and Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814. I don't expect you to jump on all of these, but if any of these articles peak your interest and you are not busy, any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 11:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The article
Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold.
It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See
Talk:Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan for things needed to be addressed.--
Finalnight (
talk)
03:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
The article
Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan you nominated as a
good article has passed
, see
Talk:Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan for eventual comments about the article. Well done!--
Finalnight (
talk)
21:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Regarding splitting up John McCain presidential campaign, 2008, my preference would be not to. It seems kind of ridiculous that we can't cover a single person's presidential campaign in just one article! There's actually much more to cover during a primary season than there is during the general election. Most of a general election is just routine campaigning, trying to get your message of the day out, trying to find some outrage or offense in something the other side's done. Little of it merits inclusion in our articles. But we'll see as it goes along. Wasted Time R ( talk) 00:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
Moving discussion to User:Happyme22/admin coaching---add that page to your watchlist. Balloonman ( talk) 19:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Although I'm taking a break from doing full GA reviews of articles, I'm trying to give some general feedback to nominators. This article looks pretty good, and it would be a great one to get to the GA level. My biggest conern was the end of the "Tower Commission" section. There is no citation for the quotations about placing the blame on Reagan. I'm assuming that this was an oversight since the rest of the article is well referenced, but it's pretty important to have a source for the claim about Reagan's responsibility. In the "Convictions, pardons, and reinstatements" section, the first two paragraphs also need thorough referencing. Best wishes with the review, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 20:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Just a heads up on Daimerej, an editor who popped up in the midst of the dispute over Jeremiah Wright's controversy page. It appears that this user is Ewness on a different computer. He has the same disruptive attitude, same behavior on the talk page of an article he started, makes the same edits on the Trinity United Church of Christ page, and talks about the talk page without ever having posted on it...besides as Ewness. Trilemma ( talk) 12:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
-- BorgQueen ( talk) 15:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry (really). I'm not trying to be contentious. For what it's worth -- I absolutely agreed with all of your other edits that changed the boosterism to neutral language. And I added in a couple more reliable sources that support that the talk is about him being the Obama's VP. If you still disagree, I'm more than open to discussion. ∴ Therefore | talk 22:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
User:Stephen_Ewen: I think this is the good hand account. He appears to be the writer attributed at the bottom of the Trinity article. the info at citizdium that it links to is identicale to the old info on one of the socks of Cyber. I am not good at providing links/ diffs. but if you would look into it and let me know what you think I'd be gratified. Funny how User:Ewenss is very similar to Stephen Ewen; his linked profile shows that he spent time in Micronesia and cm jones, an identified sock spent several years editing Saipan Sucks article here. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Stephen_Ewen/Scratch_Pad4 and its side bar shows a similiar editing style to User:Ewenss and his side bar usage in the Trinity article .Anyhoo. I like the balance you've brought to this project and the Ronald Regan article is awesome.-- Die4Dixie ( talk) 06:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Unindent> No, Citizendium is not a Wikipedia related site. Please see below. Die4Dixie ( talk) 20:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
User talk:Tiptoety. Please see this talk page as some of the info might bear a bearing on the TUCC page where I believe that ewenss/ cyberanth, et. al. have abused the system to publish original research. Die4Dixie ( talk) 20:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Think nothing of the Jimmy Carter thing. I didn't think you would do that. It seemed strange at the time.
Best wishes. Jimmuldrow ( talk) 22:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
This post is out of character, hence my question. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 08:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Regarding your comment in the AfD for Lil' Wil -- The singer has charted on at least two Billboard charts, as verified here. A charted single is almost always an assertation of notability, and I have no reason to believe otherwise. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 01:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I think the other way is the correct usage. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not really a 'fan' of the Bush family (for obvious reasons), but it's interesting that you met her in person. I wonder if she knows of the Wikipedia article? — Wackymacs ( talk ~ edits) 22:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
War has erupted on the Obama page... AGAIN. Also, Admin couching, I look forward to your run, you have my vote. ;-)— Realist2 ( Come Speak To Me) 01:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
FWIW, Happyme22, I've an identical discussion going on
here (Ooops!)
here.
— Justmeherenow
( )
06:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, i sent you an email, hope it didnt go in your spam box, im having a lot of trouble with that recently lol. --— Realist2 ( Come Speak To Me) 04:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I hope you're doing well, and thanks again for helping out with the McCain article. A small quibble, though. Aren't images of people supposed to show them facing into the text of the article, rather than away from it? Ferrylodge ( talk) 04:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I am a master student at the Institute of Technology Management, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan. Currently I am wrapping up my master thesis titled “Can Wikipedia be used for knowledge service?” In order to validate the knowledge evolution maps of identified users in Wikipedia, I need your help. I have generated a knowledge evolution map to denote your knowledge activities in Wikipedia according to your inputs including the creation and modification of contents in Wikipedia, and I need you to validate whether the generated knowledge evolution map matches the knowledge that you perceive you own it. Could you please do me a favor?
The deadline of my thesis defense is set by the end of June, 2008. There is no much time left for me to wrap up the thesis. If you can help me, please reply this message. I will send you the URL link of the first part once I receive your response. The completion of my thesis heavily relies much on your generous help.
Sincerely
JnW talk 13:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Improvements have been made to Ali Faik Zaghloul and extensive dialoge on the notablity have occurred at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ali Faik Zaghloul would you like to reconsider your "Delete" vote? Jeepday ( talk) 22:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I think you should reconsider the GA status of this article since significant portions have been blanked. Thank you.-- William Saturn ( talk) 17:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello. In light of the fact that it is the first book the U.S. government ever went to court to censor before its publication(!), I was hoping you could help improve the The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence article as part of an effort to make it worthy of becoming a [[Wikipedia:F<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href=" http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Lupin/navpop.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css&dontcountme=s">eatured article candidates|featured article candidate]]? -- Loremaster ( talk) 14:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Ive implimented most of your suggestions since you copy edited it about 6 weeks ago. Would you mind taking a look & possibly giving some feedback. I dont expect a full copy edit off you if you dont have the time lol. You have gone out of your way too much for me already. However I respect your work and the MJ lead you did has received some rave reviews. Whatever time you can give from your scedule is appreciated. Regards — Realist2 ( Come Speak To Me) 04:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Did you receive it? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Quick question. I've been asked what the WP:GAU survey meant, and I replied that pretty much everyone either wanted feedback on the article in question or else seemed reasonably happy to be participating in the process. I see you've got at least 7 GAs under your belt; can I interpret that to mean you're reasonably happy with the GA process? (Feel free to reply here) - Dan Dank55 ( talk)( mistakes) 00:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted that, Hap. I think yoou need to have some discussion regarding such, and the protocol can be found at WP:MERGE. First you propose merging and then, if you find a consensus for such, do you perform the merge. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 02:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Happyme22, have a look at your issues within the Cold War's FAC! I've updated them today and all seems to be resolved. Best, -- Eurocopter ( talk) 17:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Doesn't this seem kinda short for GA? I think it's well sourced and all, but surely there's more to say about her. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 03:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Have a good one, Hap. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 01:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
I added your article to the queue for the next update [3], but you then returned it to the nomination page. Did you not want it to be used on the main page? Nominations are moved to the next update queue when they are selected for use. -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 03:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
-- BorgQueen ( talk) 12:17, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
hello, I was wondering if you would be interested in giving the article Janet Jackson a copy-edit? Also, I've been working on Batgirl ( current FAC), Batwoman and Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814. I don't expect you to jump on all of these, but if any of these articles peak your interest and you are not busy, any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 11:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The article
Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold.
It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See
Talk:Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan for things needed to be addressed.--
Finalnight (
talk)
03:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
The article
Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan you nominated as a
good article has passed
, see
Talk:Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan for eventual comments about the article. Well done!--
Finalnight (
talk)
21:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Regarding splitting up John McCain presidential campaign, 2008, my preference would be not to. It seems kind of ridiculous that we can't cover a single person's presidential campaign in just one article! There's actually much more to cover during a primary season than there is during the general election. Most of a general election is just routine campaigning, trying to get your message of the day out, trying to find some outrage or offense in something the other side's done. Little of it merits inclusion in our articles. But we'll see as it goes along. Wasted Time R ( talk) 00:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)