![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 9 |
Hi. I reviewed your GA nomination for Plutoid and everything checked out, so I promoted it to GA status! Intothewoods29 ( talk) 00:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal
I gave this page a rather thorough make over. I'd appreciate some comments Jcwf ( talk) 01:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
-- Axiosaurus ( talk) 15:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Here's a link to astronomer Phil Plait's blog, in which he discusses the barycenter issue. Because this was only an issue for a very short amount of time, tracking down more "official" citations will be hard, but I'll look into it.
I'm still looking for info on the other comment. I can't find anything so far, and I'm not sure it's all that relevant anyway. I think you could just ditch the whole sentence. Serendi pod ous 11:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I've revised the satellites section to make the meaning clearer, and I've asked Ruslik provide a cite for the formula he used. I think he may have to step in on the other two as well, since I'm not an expert in physics. Serendi pod ous 23:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for the feedback! I have crossed out the suggestions you left here and which were solved. I also left some comments for the other ones. Nergaal ( talk) 23:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
for getting 2006 definition of planet up to GA! Serendi pod ous 22:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal Would you care to put your point of view at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Magnetic_resonance_imaging#Article_title_dispute_-_page_move_protected regards Brownturkey ( talk) 19:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
and he recommended that we recalculate his values for planetary discriminant based on DiSisto & Brunini. 2007. Icarus 190, 224, which gives a value for the mass of the Centaur population 30 times higher than the one he initially used. Therefore the true planetary discriminants for the outer planets are: Jupiter: 23000; Saturn: 6800; Uranus: 1000; Neptune: 1200. Serendi pod ous 08:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Because it means staying up for 24 solid hours arguing with creationists and reverting the witty musings of junior high schoolers. But, if you're willing to take it on, I'll go with it in the interests of public service. Serendi pod ous 11:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, could you please use an edit summary when replacing the infoboxes to the chemical elements? When a huge chunk of ~2kb of text disappears without an edit summary, the natural reaction is that it is vandalism. An edit summary would help to resolve this problem. siℓℓy rabbit ( talk) 19:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I have completed the review of Crystallographic database, which can be found at Talk:Crystallographic database/GA1. I have put the article on hold for seven days to deal with the concerns that I raised, mainly regarding sourcing. If you have any questions, please contact me on the review page (which I have watchlisted) or on my talk page. Dana boomer ( talk) 18:12, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Could you sort out what's happening as per my comment on the review page? I'm quite happy to do the review, but not clear if some one else is doing it, since review page has been started, but nothing showing at GAN apart from my hold jimfbleak ( talk) 12:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Ii is better to remove—the article is not ready yet. Ruslik ( talk) 05:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I have a degree in chemistry and I'm interested in astronomy, so that's why I'm breathing down your neck. But in fairness, I'll give you a break after this one. I try to review to a higher standard than GA, since you'll go to FAC with most of these anyway. jimfbleak ( talk) 06:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been a bit overwhelmed trying to figure out how to break the topic up. I think your "baby steps" idea is a good one. Serendi pod ous 14:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Please be bold and nominate the page yourself if you believe that it is ready. I have not edited that page for some time, and do not know the quality of it since my last edit to it. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Won't pass in their current condition, for sure. Gary King ( talk) 05:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
← Reading up on your talk page, I now realize that there have been more premature nominations than the ones in the past 24 hours, which is really disturbing. Gary King ( talk) 06:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
A minor thing but FLCs don't need to be substituted; just {{ FLC}} needs to be added to the page. Gary King ( talk) 04:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
For future reference, please also copy GA reviews to the article talk pages per the instructions. Cheers. Gary King ( talk) 04:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello Nergaal. Sorry, I had to undo your move of this article, as these regions have declared independence not this year, but many years ago. Check individual articles Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Regards, Hús ö nd 01:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Imitation. It is indeed the sincerest form of flattery. Gary King ( talk) 03:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Cheers. Gary King ( talk) 13:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I am now busy is real life, but I will review you edits tomorrow. The article needs three sections written: vertical structure including cloud layers, introduction to belts, zones and jets, and dynamics. You can try to write them yourself using, for instance, this book chapter. Ruslik ( talk) 18:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
The article should definitely be for User:Scorpion0422 to nominate, which I imagine he will. Gary King ( talk) 19:14, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't think I'm the best person to consult on this right now, as I'm rather busy with other things and don't get much chance to work on Wikipedia. Try one of the more recent contributors. RandomCritic ( talk) 23:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Not sure. Maybe User:Deuar, but I don't know if he's available. There are some other users who do or have done a lot of work on Solar System astronomy pages: User:WolfmanSF, User:Ckatz, User:Urhixidur, and others. RandomCritic ( talk) 23:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
What does it mean to rate an article "Class Bt"? Or was that a typo? - Jmabel | Talk 02:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Zap2It should be fine, as long as the linked page is an article written by a staff member there. Gary King ( talk) 02:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I see you have reverted my removal of the picture in Template:Infobox krypton. I have serious doubts if this picture carries any useful information to the reader. IMHO from this one can imagine krypton in vials forms a bubble that casts a brownish shadow or it is itself an unclear brownish substance or it is a brownish stain on a fabric. There is no way to photograph a colorless gas and any trial is doomed to defeat: instead of being helpful, may only misguide somebody. I know, pictures are nice and make the article good looking but Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a tabloid. :-) The same holds for Template:Infobox hydrogen, of course. Regards, Michał Sobkowski ( talk) 16:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for all your work on the Jovian moons template. However, I removed the images of Themisto, Lysithea, & Elara, as they appear to have no substance to them apart from being an artist's conceptions. kwami ( talk) 06:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I will probably review it tomorrow or on Thursday, but I am traveling now and may not have access to internet. Ruslik ( talk) 15:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Was there a reason you want to remove the information on atomic mass from the introduction section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luxdormiens ( talk • contribs) 21:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I want to add that you should add Magnesium to your Watchlist, since it has the atomic weight information that I did not add. That page was the basis for my adding the atomic weight info to the three pages you reverted. You may want to remove the atomic mass from the intro page for magnesium as well. -- Light ( talk) 21:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I see that you added The Simpsons season 1 topic to your page, passed two of the GANs in the topic, then tried to nominate another – which was quickly reverted. Please don't rush these nominations yet again, especially Scorpion0422's, who I know gives a lot of hard work into his GANs and FACs. Gary King ( talk) 02:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I appreciate that you have such confidence in my work, but the two articles you submitted aren't wuite ready yet. The plot section on both (and reception on one) need overhauls, and I just started school this week, so I would prefer to not be rushed to finish them. While it is true that everyone can nominate GAs, it is strongly suggested that you consult with the page's normal editors before doing so. If you could do this in the future, it would be much appreciated. -- Scorpion 0422 03:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Nergaal - sorry about that, but your changes have had the effect of putting a lot of erroneous information onto a page that was accurate as it stood. "Manual" vs "electronic" timing is, simply put, not accurate (see the discussion page). And Charlie Paddock's time never stood as a record, nor was it ever considered a record, which is why mention of it was in the footnote, not within the progression. This "destruction" you speak of is in fact reverting to what a bunch of us, myself included, had before your changes were put in. Cheers. Canada Jack ( talk) 17:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Leda2(moon).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 20:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
now that Scattered disc's FAC and the Solar System nightmare are finally winding down. I'm not sure what's been handled and what hasn't, but I'll keep an eye out for any new additions. Serendi pod ous 09:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
I would advise having a look at Ruslik's atmosphere articles. Atmosphere of Uranus, Atmosphere of Neptune, Atmosphere of Venus. He's really the atmosphere guy. Trojan's isn't GA-able yet; it needs to be doubled in size, but it can be done. Serendi pod ous 22:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey Nergaal, I've just noticed that Yttrium has been submitted for FAC. I wish to co-nominate it. Can you please explain to me how this is done? Thanks! Wii Wiki ( talk) 22:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Stability issues. The page is still not quite stable, and it's looking likely that there will be at least two changes in the standings at the end of the month, so I'm going to wait until October before going for it. -- Scorpion 0422 02:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
But you have not specified a valid e-mail address or have chosen not to receive e-mail from other users. Could you send me an email so I have your address. Regards, Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 19:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, please stop with the personal attacks at User:Matthewedwards/blank against me, per WP:NPA. Thanks. I will say that I was aware of the page, but it was written by Matthew. Perhaps consider the fact that there are others with their own opinions? Gary King ( talk) 20:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
... is completely incomprehensible. I've been rolling back "speedy" nominations that had no rationale. -- Orange Mike | Talk 00:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC) Talk pages of redirects should themselves be redirected. -- Orange Mike | Talk 00:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Hope everything is going well. I was thinking of nominating Planets beyond Neptune and Timeline of discovery of Solar System planets and their moons for the Solar System FT but before I did I wanted to clear up an issue I've had with PBN since I expanded it after it was featured. The essence of my issue can be read at Talk:Planets beyond Neptune#Reorganisation. Please let me know what you think. Serendi pod ous 11:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal. Would you please explain your reversion of my edits? Thanks, -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 18:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Nergaal;
I had no idea I was the second most active contributor to Tyrannosauridae - I'm actually much more interested in their prey items. I'll see what I can do as far as gathering appropriate refs. J. Spencer ( talk) 02:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
On Cultural Depictions: I'd be happy to submit it, except I was waiting to see what others had to say, and then it fell by the wayside (we had concerns raised on the talk page, but aside from the citation templates, they were never specified). J. Spencer ( talk) 01:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, me and Bellhalla and MBK004 and Malaria (and others) are gunning for an FT on the topic, but we are short two critical articles for the FT attempt. The first article, USS Iowa turret explosion, is an important part of the planned FT attempt, but at the moment is woefully inadequate for any FT attempt. Cla68 is in the process of overhauling the article to bring it up to FA standards. The other article deals with the various proposals for the conversions of the Iowa class battleships, one that MBK has been researching off site and hipes to add soon. We think another two monthes before we will be ready for an FT shot, we should give us enough time to get everything up to FA. Glady to so that the effort hasn't fallen on blind eyes though, the more people that take an interst the better :) TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes, all done. I tend to give your articles a fair grilling at GA because we both know that they will go on to FAC. I've left a couple of pointers for that, regarding the lead and inconsistency in ref formatting. I don't know if you can find an image to illustrate the uses in optics? The forced thumbnail size for nucleophilic addition might have to go, I normally remove these because they override my preference settings, but left for you to consider. Good luck jimfbleak ( talk) 06:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to know how I was "vandalizing" the Romania article. You reversed three hours of work I put into the article. I understand removing some of the images, but to remove all of them is just ridiculous. I resized a few images to make the article more orderly and less bulky. How is that vandalism?? Samantha555 ( talk) 01:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey there. Due to an error with an external program I use, I inadvertently reverted your edits to Dacian Wars. I apologize for any inconvenience. - PoinDexta1 | Talk to Me | 00:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
The guidelines for Wikipedia:Peer review ask that editors nominate no more than one article per day (and four total at any one time). While the rules say that one of the requests can be removed, I will let it slide since this is the first time. Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for reassessing the quality of the article Marge in Chains to B-quality status. I have been doing some work on sourcing related to that and the next thing I want to do is work through and incorporate the sources listed in the "Further reading" section as actual sources in the article, and then expand the WP:LEAD and that's pretty much it before I think it could be ready for a GA Review. Cheers, Cirt ( talk) 04:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
For getting Moons of Jupiter to FL!!! Serendi pod ous 20:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Dear Daniel Mayer,
This email confirms that you have paid Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. $25.00 USD using PayPal.
It may take a few moments for this transaction to appear in the Recent Activity list on your Account Overview. This credit card transaction will appear on your bill as "PAYPAL *WIKIMEDIA".
The article
Adrastea (moon) 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:Adrastea (moon) for things needed to be addressed.
Wronkiew (
talk)
06:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you for commenting about our positive interactions during featured processes. Thank you, Cirt ( talk) 02:06, 16 September 2008 (UTC) |
Which of my Roman articles do you think might be of GA-quality? I don't mind at all if you submit them. After I got Constitution of the Roman Republic and Roman Republic promoted to GA status, I started focusing on other things, and never got around to working on other GA nominations. RomanHistorian ( talk) 06:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I personally don't consider that a breach of wp:civil, I think a bit of well humoured banter lightens the atmosphere! Fasach Nua ( talk) 10:07, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I am reviewing your article, Metis (moon), for GA. It seems to be a good little article. I have left a few comments on the review page and may be leaving more. Please feel free to contact me with comments or questions. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 19:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Are you trying to create a 6th season topic drive? CTJF83 Talk 01:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I have told you before, please don't make boxes such as Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/The Simpsons (season 6), Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/The Simpsons episodes and Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/The Simpsons (season 4). You can instead make it in your Wikiproject space (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons/The Simpsons (season 6)) or your own namespace (e.g. User:Nergaal/The Simpsons (season 6)). You shouldn't make boxes in the FTC namespace until you are ready to bring them, as in the meantime, if someone stumbles across them, it is likely to cause confusion, and also there is no guarantee that you will end up bringing the topic to FTC at all - rst20xx ( talk) 16:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Hope you're up to another dwarf planet. We've got a mountain to climb. Serendi pod ous 21:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
"Jupiter mass" is a pointless article and should be merged with Jupiter. "Galilean moons" probably doesn't need to be in the topic if we're already including all the moons individually. "Trojan asteroid" is interesting because it could become part of the Jupiter subtopic, the asteroid belt subtopic, or even the Solar System topic itself. I think you can leave it out for now. I suppose, realistically, "Exploration of Jupiter" will have to be included, but it's a close thing for me. shoemaker-Levy 9 I can take or leave. Serendi pod ous 09:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey, just to let you know that I won't be able to address any other issues with this article for the next few days, probably more. I've no doubt that you'll be able to, you've done great work to it over the past couple of months. Best, – Toon (talk) 22:54, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate that you have taken an interest in WP:SIMPSONS, but could you please start creating pages for FT drives? The point of a drive is so that you have a group of editors focusing their energy on a group of articles, and when you have four going at once (especially considering that we are a small project) it takes away the focus. Let us finish with season 4, then we'll figure out where to go from there. -- Scorpion 0422 23:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
My primary concern is that I shouldn't have to bring up any of the menial comments in the first place. I post a lot of the same comments across multiple GANs; it shouldn't be that way. Gary King ( talk) 23:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
-- Spencer T♦ C 00:50, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I reverted your change to Jeffpw's memorial page because it seemed disrespectful. In looking at your long contribution history after I had reverted, I'm guessing you didn't intend it to be disrespectful.. I won't revert you again if you decide to put it back, but you should keep in mind that without some sort of explanation in an edit summary or other comment on the page.. adding a {{fact}} tag, well.. seems disrespectful. -- Versa geek 01:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I did not choose that name lightly, but rather preferred to use the name that is most commonly used in the literature. Search and you'll see that it outnumbers "dihydrogen cation" by a factor of 100. -- Itub ( talk) 06:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on List of elements by atomic properties requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.
Mission Fleg (
talk)
02:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't trust it. It seems to be just one lone postgrad with too much time on his hands. We might as well be citing Wikipedia. Serendi pod ous 17:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Nergaal, I hope you didn't think I was being stubborn. The point I was trying to make is that the future episodes were unsourced. Ones already aired are easily verified but there is usually plenty of speculation as to names/dates/etc. of those yet to air. For this reason I saw it necessary to require reliable sources to verify any future episodes in the list. Anyway I have spent some time on the NBC website and have found some news release to verify these episodes. I have added them as references to the Season 5 page (which transcludes to the episode list), I hope you don't mind. I am now satisfied with a very good list and have offered my support accordingly. Best wishes, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia's epic FL directors Matthewedwards and Scorpion0422 have decided to try another FL contest as a follow up to the one held last June. As you are a regular at WP:FLC, you may be interested in taking a look at the new one, which will have different rules. Although they are still being fiddled with, three FLs in different topics will be required this time around. For more information, see here. A start date has not yet been determined, but it will likely begin some time next week. Thanks for the time, Scorpion 0422 22:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi,Nergaal. I've posted my initial comments at Talk:Tyrannosauridae/GA1, also accessible via Talk:Tyrannosauridae. -- Philcha ( talk) 21:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, no sarcasm from me this time I'm afraid. I regret to inform you that due to ongoing problems I put Gliese 581 c up for a Good Article Reassessment as I feel it has failed the stability criterion (Good Article criterion #5) and possibly a couple of others as well. Icalanise ( talk) 22:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Please accept this notice to join the
Good Article Collaboration Center, a project aimed at improving five articles to GA status every month. We hope to see you there!--
LAA
Fan
sign
review
02:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC) {{{1}}} |
Nergaal, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, Spencer T♦ C 02:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Congrats on all your hard work. Note my comments at GA page. Thanks. — ceranthor ( strike) 23:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
The {{ FLC}} and {{ FAC}} and to be transcluded on talk pages, not substituted. If it is substituted then someone has to fix them for the bot to work, as it has been done for the previous FLCs. Gary King ( talk) 15:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal!
We thank you for uploading
Image:2003 EL61.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes
copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a
copyright tag, it may be
deleted by an
Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a
copyright tag to the
image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the
media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a
robot.
-- John Bot III ( talk) 03:26, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you have a few articles nominated at WP:GAN. If you could review one or more good article nominations to help reduce the backlog and waiting time, it would be greatly appreciated. Help and advice on how to do so is available at Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles, and you can ask for the help of a GAN mentor, if you wish. Thanks, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 20:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, several of the periodic table related FLs have merge tags and I found this discussion, where there appears to be consensus for a merge, but nobody has done it for whatever reason. If you want to merge the pages, that would be fine, but the FLs would have to be formally delisted first (which shouldn't be a problem, it has been done before). Is there someone within the chemistry project who would be willing to do this? I would, but I don't have a lot of expertise with the periodic table (I barely passed the last chemistry class I took) so it would probably be better for someone familiar with the subject to do it. -- Scorpion 0422 15:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Hey - I see you started working on your own sortable list, and so far so good. I finally got around to data dumping everything into my table generator and have created a very basic version of my own at User:JPG-GR/Sandbox3. I've still gotta add some more of the more "advanced" data, such as what you have, but have got to get that all copied into my database before I can whip it up quickly. Let me know what you think. JPG-GR ( talk) 03:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I noticed that when editing So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show, that you tend to make a series of many small edits, rather than using the preview button and then continuing to the next edit. This results in a very, very long history for the article; clutters up watchlists; and (not sure if you ever plan to run for administrator, but in case you do plan to run) can be seen by some as an attempt to run up your count of mainspace edits. Mostly I'm concerned about the second issue; for the past couple of days now, over half of the edits on my watchlist are by you, to this article. Could you please try to combine smaller edits in the future? It's kinda one of those "unwritten customs" on WP--nobody will block you for what you're doing, but it would be helpful if you didn't. Thanks! Gladys J Cortez 06:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I responded to your comment left on my/the top of the article's top page. A lack of information about the topic within wikipedia should not be an excuse for lack of expansion, since MoS states that wikipedia articles cannot be used as references. If the southwest Pacific section, for example, is extremely short and confounding the formatting, then do some googling or visit the library and see if they have any info that could expand the related sections. Thegreatdr ( talk) 22:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I've sourced the Production and Cultural references sections in the " So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show" article you are working on. It may need some copyediting and the Links section should be like this. Otherwise it's close the GA quality. Good luck! :) -- TheLeft orium 15:35, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
by wikifying the External links section? Serendi pod ous 15:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
You know, I did ask you what you thought of a merge long before I started the FLRC. Anyway, it's one thing to oppose a merge, but there are some serious problems with both pages that I mentioned, so you really shouldn't vote "keep" until after those concerns are addressed. A FLRC isn't like a FLC, they will be delisted if issues aren't addressed, even if there is outstanding support for keeping it listed. -- Scorpion 0422 00:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello there!
You have been invited to enter C4v3m4n's Contest!.
The contest is designed to provide users with a challenge while still having fun! This month's contest is focused on Movember, a month designed to to raise awareness and funds for men's health issues, such as prostate cancer and depression in Australia and New Zealand.
Follow the link given above to find out more information. Hope to see you there!
I don't know if this the best place to respond but thanks for taking on the task of reviewing! I'll go search for a better top image: I should admit I have a degree which includes chemistry, but not biology (however that was 36 years ago). Technically, it actually seems the condition is initiated by the HO· radical, but I don't have an image of that either. Could you have a look at the refs I've provided for your fact-tags: on a couple of places I'm not sure which part of the sentence you wanted to be sourced. Finally, I can easily remove the refs from the lead (see Talk:Oxygen_toxicity#GA_suggestions) but reading WP:LEADCITE seems to suggest the opposite. Perhaps you can clarify that? Thanks -- RexxS ( talk) 04:22, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I have reviewed the article you nominated, Cultural depictions of dinosaurs, and have placed it on hold. See the review here. You have 7 days to edit it until it conforms to the Good Article criteria, but I am sure that it will be fine. Good luck! (is that a contradiction? never mind) - weebiloobil ( talk) 21:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I left some comments on the above FLC. Dabomb87 ( talk) 00:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Do you intend to make any further improvements to this article? -- Philcha ( talk) 07:33, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I am reviewing your article, So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show for GA and have left some comments on Talk:So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show/GA1 for you to address before I pass it. Basically the article is fine and close to GA. Please feel free to contact me with comments or questions. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 22:21, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal! I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that I began the GA review of History of the Roman Constitution several days ago. I have some concerns with the referencing of the article, so before I complete a thorough prose review I'd like to make sure that there are editors still interested in working on the article. Could you drop me a note, either on my talk page or on the review page, to let me know? I'm also going to drop a note on the talk page of the main editor, to let him know of my concerns. Thank you! Dana boomer ( talk) 14:17, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I've already begun prelim research on the Jupiter Trojans, so, if you want to target Exploration of Jupiter, just leave the Trojans to me and we'll have this FT up for consideration before the end of the year. Serendi pod ous 19:04, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=55_Cancri_f&diff=226925523&oldid=226921166
Nergaal (
talk)
21:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
I was interested in your suggestions on a couple of things.
GabrielVelasquez ( talk) 03:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:2008 South Ossetia war.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Wronkiew (
talk)
16:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
|
Please don't change my formatting. I wanted a seperate heading for a reason. Pursey Talk | Contribs 22:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for reviewing my FLC. I responded to your comment. -- Goodraise ( talk) 01:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello, Nergaal | |
Congratulations for finding my hidden User page! ≈ The Haunted Angel 21:40, 4 November 2008 (UTC) |
I'm not going to withdraw this one, but I was planning on waiting before GACing it because I'm still not yet done with the 5 family members and once I finished with them I was planning on cleaning up the page a bit with facts from those pages. -- Scorpion 0422 23:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm not angry or anything in the least bit, but I would just like to say that it's usually nice to inform someone that you're nominating a FT/GT that has a majority, in some cases over 90%, of articles that they have worked to promote. Common courtesy, ya know? Like I said, I'm not angry or upset, not even a bit perturbed, but some people might be. Great job helping on the Season 4 article, and happy editing - Mastrchf ( t/ c) 02:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I am currently reviewing your article, Exploration of Jupiter, for GA and have left some comments at Talk:Exploration of Jupiter/GA1. I notice that you are doing a lot of editing today! Feel free to contact me with questions or comments. Regards, — Mattisse( Talk) 23:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal, I wanted to nominate it for FA when I have time to do so. In the next time I am not available to help. The real world is forcing me to do work there. Would have been nice if the person written most of the article would be asked befor nominating it. But ... So good luck!-- Stone ( talk) 05:41, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Your review of Peak uranium have been on hold for 32 days. Normal procedure is to fail the article after 7 days. Please finish the review. Thanks.-- MrStalker ( talk) 14:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I started reviewing Executive Magistrates of the Roman Republic which you nominated. I also notified User:RomanHistorian as he was the main content editor. Fainites barley 21:13, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I have a nitpick on your otherwise excellent "Periodic Table by Radioactivity.PNG" image. Seaborgium is not a color that is listed in the referring legends. its a pink, while the legends go orange->red->dark-red. Cheers. DavidRF ( talk) 17:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I have taken over the GA review of your article, Hafnium, as the first review does seem to be missing. I have done some copy editing and may do more, as it needs a good copy edit. You should check my editing for accuracy. Also, I have left some comments at Talk:Hafnium/GA1 and will probably add more. Please feel free to contact me with questions or comments. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 19:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Good work, good help, good article!-- Stone ( talk) 22:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article
Batman (film series) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
Drilnoth (
talk)
15:10, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Heh heh, now you can add the featured pictures you nominated to that sidebar on the side of your page. <In case you didn't know, use (edit page first to see) Image:name.format>. — Ceran ♦ ( talk) 02:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Deep model Jupiter.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Shalow model Jupiter.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
The article
Batman (film series) 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:Batman (film series) for things needed to be addressed.
Drilnoth (
talk)
13:25, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Batman (film series) has passed its GA review and is now a Good Article. Remember that you can also help with articles by reviewing other articles here. - Drilnoth ( talk) 03:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Further waiting does not make any sense, so I nominated it for featured article. You are a co-nominator. Ruslik ( talk) 14:26, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I won't put the thumbnail here, but the above nomination was successful. (Insert boilerplate text here). MER-C 03:08, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Nergaal.
Thanks for giving me the heads up with the whole good topic thing; sorry I didn't get back to you earlier on the topic.
A possible GTN could end up floating around the instant after the passing of HD 40307 itself into GA status, so until then we'll just have to sit tight.
Thanks, -- Starstriker7( Dime algo or see my works) 06:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Well done on Exploration of Jupiter! Just one more article to get up, and I'm afraid it's a doozy. Getting Jupiter Trojan up to code will be a harder job than Scattered disc, which nearly broke me (that article should never have gotten a GA shield- it was never reviewed and didn't deserve one). I don't mean to be a party pooper; I know how hard you've worked to get the Jupiter topic off the ground, but the FT guys were pretty insistent that the Trojan article had to be included, either as part of the Jupiter subtopic or as part of the main topic. Serendi pod ous 18:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
SandyGeorgia: but the article appears to be within criteria now. I think this means it is featured now.-- Stone ( talk) 23:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I notice that you created {{ FTC-icon}}. Would you be in favour of replacing its image with a candidate version I have just made? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Slightly gone off my radar. Hope to get round to it in the course of the week. Looking better though. Fainites barley scribs 21:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I think I've gotten all the production information available from the DVD. -- TheLeft orium 22:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I've reviewed the article Equestrian order for its nomination for Good Article status. I have some major concerns about referencing along with others concerns, so I am placing the article on hold for seven days. My complete review may be found here. If you have any questions about the review or individual issues I have raised, please note them on the review page (which is on my watchlist) and I will answer them there. When you have addressed the issues I have mentioned, I will be happy to reevaluate the nomination. Thanks, and good editing. — Bellhalla ( talk) 17:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your advices. I think I’m gonna expand the lower part of the map in order to have more space for the legend. What is wrong with the placement of "Nashville"? The state borders of the displyed area are the same today as in 1864. Why do I need to mention the year? Regards, Andrei nacu( talk) 19:11, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Review done. Fainites barley scribs 15:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Last few bits to do. Fainites barley scribs 18:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
You haven't been around my neck of the woods recently. I was wondering if you were interested in collaborating with me on Jupiter Trojan Serendi pod ous 01:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I just noticed that you nominated these two articles: USS Alaska (CB-1) and USS Hawaii (CB-3). I feel that these nominations might be premature since the primary author is not done and he is on a semi-wikibreak for the holidays. It may be best to withdraw these noms and let Ed complete the articles first. As an editor who focuses on these type of articles I am certain that the articles are incomplete and one of them even lacks some references and is not even close to GA status. Of course, you're free to do what you wish, and this is just a friendly heads-up. - MBK 004 01:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
You can work on it if you want to. I probably won't get anything done anyway. -- Maitch ( talk) 06:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Take a look at my review. Rockk3r Spit it Out! 20:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I "supported" the list now. Good job bro. Rockk3r Spit it Out! 03:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Congrats. Nice article. Fainites barley scribs 20:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Are you planning on solving it? Because I certainly can't, and the only person I know who could is Ruslik and he's too busy right now. Serendi pod ous 00:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Feel free to contribute to the conversation, since it will likely impact if/when the article gets reviewed for, let alone reaches, GA. Your input would be appreciated. Thegreatdr ( talk) 01:43, 29 December 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 9 |
Hi. I reviewed your GA nomination for Plutoid and everything checked out, so I promoted it to GA status! Intothewoods29 ( talk) 00:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal
I gave this page a rather thorough make over. I'd appreciate some comments Jcwf ( talk) 01:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
-- Axiosaurus ( talk) 15:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Here's a link to astronomer Phil Plait's blog, in which he discusses the barycenter issue. Because this was only an issue for a very short amount of time, tracking down more "official" citations will be hard, but I'll look into it.
I'm still looking for info on the other comment. I can't find anything so far, and I'm not sure it's all that relevant anyway. I think you could just ditch the whole sentence. Serendi pod ous 11:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I've revised the satellites section to make the meaning clearer, and I've asked Ruslik provide a cite for the formula he used. I think he may have to step in on the other two as well, since I'm not an expert in physics. Serendi pod ous 23:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for the feedback! I have crossed out the suggestions you left here and which were solved. I also left some comments for the other ones. Nergaal ( talk) 23:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
for getting 2006 definition of planet up to GA! Serendi pod ous 22:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal Would you care to put your point of view at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Magnetic_resonance_imaging#Article_title_dispute_-_page_move_protected regards Brownturkey ( talk) 19:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
and he recommended that we recalculate his values for planetary discriminant based on DiSisto & Brunini. 2007. Icarus 190, 224, which gives a value for the mass of the Centaur population 30 times higher than the one he initially used. Therefore the true planetary discriminants for the outer planets are: Jupiter: 23000; Saturn: 6800; Uranus: 1000; Neptune: 1200. Serendi pod ous 08:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Because it means staying up for 24 solid hours arguing with creationists and reverting the witty musings of junior high schoolers. But, if you're willing to take it on, I'll go with it in the interests of public service. Serendi pod ous 11:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, could you please use an edit summary when replacing the infoboxes to the chemical elements? When a huge chunk of ~2kb of text disappears without an edit summary, the natural reaction is that it is vandalism. An edit summary would help to resolve this problem. siℓℓy rabbit ( talk) 19:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I have completed the review of Crystallographic database, which can be found at Talk:Crystallographic database/GA1. I have put the article on hold for seven days to deal with the concerns that I raised, mainly regarding sourcing. If you have any questions, please contact me on the review page (which I have watchlisted) or on my talk page. Dana boomer ( talk) 18:12, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Could you sort out what's happening as per my comment on the review page? I'm quite happy to do the review, but not clear if some one else is doing it, since review page has been started, but nothing showing at GAN apart from my hold jimfbleak ( talk) 12:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Ii is better to remove—the article is not ready yet. Ruslik ( talk) 05:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I have a degree in chemistry and I'm interested in astronomy, so that's why I'm breathing down your neck. But in fairness, I'll give you a break after this one. I try to review to a higher standard than GA, since you'll go to FAC with most of these anyway. jimfbleak ( talk) 06:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been a bit overwhelmed trying to figure out how to break the topic up. I think your "baby steps" idea is a good one. Serendi pod ous 14:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Please be bold and nominate the page yourself if you believe that it is ready. I have not edited that page for some time, and do not know the quality of it since my last edit to it. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Won't pass in their current condition, for sure. Gary King ( talk) 05:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
← Reading up on your talk page, I now realize that there have been more premature nominations than the ones in the past 24 hours, which is really disturbing. Gary King ( talk) 06:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
A minor thing but FLCs don't need to be substituted; just {{ FLC}} needs to be added to the page. Gary King ( talk) 04:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
For future reference, please also copy GA reviews to the article talk pages per the instructions. Cheers. Gary King ( talk) 04:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello Nergaal. Sorry, I had to undo your move of this article, as these regions have declared independence not this year, but many years ago. Check individual articles Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Regards, Hús ö nd 01:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Imitation. It is indeed the sincerest form of flattery. Gary King ( talk) 03:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Cheers. Gary King ( talk) 13:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I am now busy is real life, but I will review you edits tomorrow. The article needs three sections written: vertical structure including cloud layers, introduction to belts, zones and jets, and dynamics. You can try to write them yourself using, for instance, this book chapter. Ruslik ( talk) 18:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
The article should definitely be for User:Scorpion0422 to nominate, which I imagine he will. Gary King ( talk) 19:14, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't think I'm the best person to consult on this right now, as I'm rather busy with other things and don't get much chance to work on Wikipedia. Try one of the more recent contributors. RandomCritic ( talk) 23:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Not sure. Maybe User:Deuar, but I don't know if he's available. There are some other users who do or have done a lot of work on Solar System astronomy pages: User:WolfmanSF, User:Ckatz, User:Urhixidur, and others. RandomCritic ( talk) 23:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
What does it mean to rate an article "Class Bt"? Or was that a typo? - Jmabel | Talk 02:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Zap2It should be fine, as long as the linked page is an article written by a staff member there. Gary King ( talk) 02:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I see you have reverted my removal of the picture in Template:Infobox krypton. I have serious doubts if this picture carries any useful information to the reader. IMHO from this one can imagine krypton in vials forms a bubble that casts a brownish shadow or it is itself an unclear brownish substance or it is a brownish stain on a fabric. There is no way to photograph a colorless gas and any trial is doomed to defeat: instead of being helpful, may only misguide somebody. I know, pictures are nice and make the article good looking but Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a tabloid. :-) The same holds for Template:Infobox hydrogen, of course. Regards, Michał Sobkowski ( talk) 16:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for all your work on the Jovian moons template. However, I removed the images of Themisto, Lysithea, & Elara, as they appear to have no substance to them apart from being an artist's conceptions. kwami ( talk) 06:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I will probably review it tomorrow or on Thursday, but I am traveling now and may not have access to internet. Ruslik ( talk) 15:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Was there a reason you want to remove the information on atomic mass from the introduction section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luxdormiens ( talk • contribs) 21:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I want to add that you should add Magnesium to your Watchlist, since it has the atomic weight information that I did not add. That page was the basis for my adding the atomic weight info to the three pages you reverted. You may want to remove the atomic mass from the intro page for magnesium as well. -- Light ( talk) 21:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I see that you added The Simpsons season 1 topic to your page, passed two of the GANs in the topic, then tried to nominate another – which was quickly reverted. Please don't rush these nominations yet again, especially Scorpion0422's, who I know gives a lot of hard work into his GANs and FACs. Gary King ( talk) 02:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I appreciate that you have such confidence in my work, but the two articles you submitted aren't wuite ready yet. The plot section on both (and reception on one) need overhauls, and I just started school this week, so I would prefer to not be rushed to finish them. While it is true that everyone can nominate GAs, it is strongly suggested that you consult with the page's normal editors before doing so. If you could do this in the future, it would be much appreciated. -- Scorpion 0422 03:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Nergaal - sorry about that, but your changes have had the effect of putting a lot of erroneous information onto a page that was accurate as it stood. "Manual" vs "electronic" timing is, simply put, not accurate (see the discussion page). And Charlie Paddock's time never stood as a record, nor was it ever considered a record, which is why mention of it was in the footnote, not within the progression. This "destruction" you speak of is in fact reverting to what a bunch of us, myself included, had before your changes were put in. Cheers. Canada Jack ( talk) 17:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Leda2(moon).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 20:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
now that Scattered disc's FAC and the Solar System nightmare are finally winding down. I'm not sure what's been handled and what hasn't, but I'll keep an eye out for any new additions. Serendi pod ous 09:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
I would advise having a look at Ruslik's atmosphere articles. Atmosphere of Uranus, Atmosphere of Neptune, Atmosphere of Venus. He's really the atmosphere guy. Trojan's isn't GA-able yet; it needs to be doubled in size, but it can be done. Serendi pod ous 22:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey Nergaal, I've just noticed that Yttrium has been submitted for FAC. I wish to co-nominate it. Can you please explain to me how this is done? Thanks! Wii Wiki ( talk) 22:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Stability issues. The page is still not quite stable, and it's looking likely that there will be at least two changes in the standings at the end of the month, so I'm going to wait until October before going for it. -- Scorpion 0422 02:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
But you have not specified a valid e-mail address or have chosen not to receive e-mail from other users. Could you send me an email so I have your address. Regards, Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 19:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, please stop with the personal attacks at User:Matthewedwards/blank against me, per WP:NPA. Thanks. I will say that I was aware of the page, but it was written by Matthew. Perhaps consider the fact that there are others with their own opinions? Gary King ( talk) 20:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
... is completely incomprehensible. I've been rolling back "speedy" nominations that had no rationale. -- Orange Mike | Talk 00:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC) Talk pages of redirects should themselves be redirected. -- Orange Mike | Talk 00:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Hope everything is going well. I was thinking of nominating Planets beyond Neptune and Timeline of discovery of Solar System planets and their moons for the Solar System FT but before I did I wanted to clear up an issue I've had with PBN since I expanded it after it was featured. The essence of my issue can be read at Talk:Planets beyond Neptune#Reorganisation. Please let me know what you think. Serendi pod ous 11:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal. Would you please explain your reversion of my edits? Thanks, -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 18:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Nergaal;
I had no idea I was the second most active contributor to Tyrannosauridae - I'm actually much more interested in their prey items. I'll see what I can do as far as gathering appropriate refs. J. Spencer ( talk) 02:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
On Cultural Depictions: I'd be happy to submit it, except I was waiting to see what others had to say, and then it fell by the wayside (we had concerns raised on the talk page, but aside from the citation templates, they were never specified). J. Spencer ( talk) 01:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, me and Bellhalla and MBK004 and Malaria (and others) are gunning for an FT on the topic, but we are short two critical articles for the FT attempt. The first article, USS Iowa turret explosion, is an important part of the planned FT attempt, but at the moment is woefully inadequate for any FT attempt. Cla68 is in the process of overhauling the article to bring it up to FA standards. The other article deals with the various proposals for the conversions of the Iowa class battleships, one that MBK has been researching off site and hipes to add soon. We think another two monthes before we will be ready for an FT shot, we should give us enough time to get everything up to FA. Glady to so that the effort hasn't fallen on blind eyes though, the more people that take an interst the better :) TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes, all done. I tend to give your articles a fair grilling at GA because we both know that they will go on to FAC. I've left a couple of pointers for that, regarding the lead and inconsistency in ref formatting. I don't know if you can find an image to illustrate the uses in optics? The forced thumbnail size for nucleophilic addition might have to go, I normally remove these because they override my preference settings, but left for you to consider. Good luck jimfbleak ( talk) 06:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to know how I was "vandalizing" the Romania article. You reversed three hours of work I put into the article. I understand removing some of the images, but to remove all of them is just ridiculous. I resized a few images to make the article more orderly and less bulky. How is that vandalism?? Samantha555 ( talk) 01:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey there. Due to an error with an external program I use, I inadvertently reverted your edits to Dacian Wars. I apologize for any inconvenience. - PoinDexta1 | Talk to Me | 00:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
The guidelines for Wikipedia:Peer review ask that editors nominate no more than one article per day (and four total at any one time). While the rules say that one of the requests can be removed, I will let it slide since this is the first time. Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for reassessing the quality of the article Marge in Chains to B-quality status. I have been doing some work on sourcing related to that and the next thing I want to do is work through and incorporate the sources listed in the "Further reading" section as actual sources in the article, and then expand the WP:LEAD and that's pretty much it before I think it could be ready for a GA Review. Cheers, Cirt ( talk) 04:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
For getting Moons of Jupiter to FL!!! Serendi pod ous 20:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Dear Daniel Mayer,
This email confirms that you have paid Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. $25.00 USD using PayPal.
It may take a few moments for this transaction to appear in the Recent Activity list on your Account Overview. This credit card transaction will appear on your bill as "PAYPAL *WIKIMEDIA".
The article
Adrastea (moon) 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:Adrastea (moon) for things needed to be addressed.
Wronkiew (
talk)
06:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you for commenting about our positive interactions during featured processes. Thank you, Cirt ( talk) 02:06, 16 September 2008 (UTC) |
Which of my Roman articles do you think might be of GA-quality? I don't mind at all if you submit them. After I got Constitution of the Roman Republic and Roman Republic promoted to GA status, I started focusing on other things, and never got around to working on other GA nominations. RomanHistorian ( talk) 06:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I personally don't consider that a breach of wp:civil, I think a bit of well humoured banter lightens the atmosphere! Fasach Nua ( talk) 10:07, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I am reviewing your article, Metis (moon), for GA. It seems to be a good little article. I have left a few comments on the review page and may be leaving more. Please feel free to contact me with comments or questions. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 19:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Are you trying to create a 6th season topic drive? CTJF83 Talk 01:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I have told you before, please don't make boxes such as Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/The Simpsons (season 6), Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/The Simpsons episodes and Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/The Simpsons (season 4). You can instead make it in your Wikiproject space (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons/The Simpsons (season 6)) or your own namespace (e.g. User:Nergaal/The Simpsons (season 6)). You shouldn't make boxes in the FTC namespace until you are ready to bring them, as in the meantime, if someone stumbles across them, it is likely to cause confusion, and also there is no guarantee that you will end up bringing the topic to FTC at all - rst20xx ( talk) 16:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Hope you're up to another dwarf planet. We've got a mountain to climb. Serendi pod ous 21:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
"Jupiter mass" is a pointless article and should be merged with Jupiter. "Galilean moons" probably doesn't need to be in the topic if we're already including all the moons individually. "Trojan asteroid" is interesting because it could become part of the Jupiter subtopic, the asteroid belt subtopic, or even the Solar System topic itself. I think you can leave it out for now. I suppose, realistically, "Exploration of Jupiter" will have to be included, but it's a close thing for me. shoemaker-Levy 9 I can take or leave. Serendi pod ous 09:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey, just to let you know that I won't be able to address any other issues with this article for the next few days, probably more. I've no doubt that you'll be able to, you've done great work to it over the past couple of months. Best, – Toon (talk) 22:54, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate that you have taken an interest in WP:SIMPSONS, but could you please start creating pages for FT drives? The point of a drive is so that you have a group of editors focusing their energy on a group of articles, and when you have four going at once (especially considering that we are a small project) it takes away the focus. Let us finish with season 4, then we'll figure out where to go from there. -- Scorpion 0422 23:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
My primary concern is that I shouldn't have to bring up any of the menial comments in the first place. I post a lot of the same comments across multiple GANs; it shouldn't be that way. Gary King ( talk) 23:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
-- Spencer T♦ C 00:50, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I reverted your change to Jeffpw's memorial page because it seemed disrespectful. In looking at your long contribution history after I had reverted, I'm guessing you didn't intend it to be disrespectful.. I won't revert you again if you decide to put it back, but you should keep in mind that without some sort of explanation in an edit summary or other comment on the page.. adding a {{fact}} tag, well.. seems disrespectful. -- Versa geek 01:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I did not choose that name lightly, but rather preferred to use the name that is most commonly used in the literature. Search and you'll see that it outnumbers "dihydrogen cation" by a factor of 100. -- Itub ( talk) 06:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on List of elements by atomic properties requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.
Mission Fleg (
talk)
02:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't trust it. It seems to be just one lone postgrad with too much time on his hands. We might as well be citing Wikipedia. Serendi pod ous 17:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Nergaal, I hope you didn't think I was being stubborn. The point I was trying to make is that the future episodes were unsourced. Ones already aired are easily verified but there is usually plenty of speculation as to names/dates/etc. of those yet to air. For this reason I saw it necessary to require reliable sources to verify any future episodes in the list. Anyway I have spent some time on the NBC website and have found some news release to verify these episodes. I have added them as references to the Season 5 page (which transcludes to the episode list), I hope you don't mind. I am now satisfied with a very good list and have offered my support accordingly. Best wishes, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia's epic FL directors Matthewedwards and Scorpion0422 have decided to try another FL contest as a follow up to the one held last June. As you are a regular at WP:FLC, you may be interested in taking a look at the new one, which will have different rules. Although they are still being fiddled with, three FLs in different topics will be required this time around. For more information, see here. A start date has not yet been determined, but it will likely begin some time next week. Thanks for the time, Scorpion 0422 22:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi,Nergaal. I've posted my initial comments at Talk:Tyrannosauridae/GA1, also accessible via Talk:Tyrannosauridae. -- Philcha ( talk) 21:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, no sarcasm from me this time I'm afraid. I regret to inform you that due to ongoing problems I put Gliese 581 c up for a Good Article Reassessment as I feel it has failed the stability criterion (Good Article criterion #5) and possibly a couple of others as well. Icalanise ( talk) 22:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Please accept this notice to join the
Good Article Collaboration Center, a project aimed at improving five articles to GA status every month. We hope to see you there!--
LAA
Fan
sign
review
02:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC) {{{1}}} |
Nergaal, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, Spencer T♦ C 02:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Congrats on all your hard work. Note my comments at GA page. Thanks. — ceranthor ( strike) 23:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
The {{ FLC}} and {{ FAC}} and to be transcluded on talk pages, not substituted. If it is substituted then someone has to fix them for the bot to work, as it has been done for the previous FLCs. Gary King ( talk) 15:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal!
We thank you for uploading
Image:2003 EL61.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes
copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a
copyright tag, it may be
deleted by an
Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a
copyright tag to the
image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the
media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a
robot.
-- John Bot III ( talk) 03:26, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you have a few articles nominated at WP:GAN. If you could review one or more good article nominations to help reduce the backlog and waiting time, it would be greatly appreciated. Help and advice on how to do so is available at Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles, and you can ask for the help of a GAN mentor, if you wish. Thanks, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 20:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, several of the periodic table related FLs have merge tags and I found this discussion, where there appears to be consensus for a merge, but nobody has done it for whatever reason. If you want to merge the pages, that would be fine, but the FLs would have to be formally delisted first (which shouldn't be a problem, it has been done before). Is there someone within the chemistry project who would be willing to do this? I would, but I don't have a lot of expertise with the periodic table (I barely passed the last chemistry class I took) so it would probably be better for someone familiar with the subject to do it. -- Scorpion 0422 15:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Hey - I see you started working on your own sortable list, and so far so good. I finally got around to data dumping everything into my table generator and have created a very basic version of my own at User:JPG-GR/Sandbox3. I've still gotta add some more of the more "advanced" data, such as what you have, but have got to get that all copied into my database before I can whip it up quickly. Let me know what you think. JPG-GR ( talk) 03:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I noticed that when editing So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show, that you tend to make a series of many small edits, rather than using the preview button and then continuing to the next edit. This results in a very, very long history for the article; clutters up watchlists; and (not sure if you ever plan to run for administrator, but in case you do plan to run) can be seen by some as an attempt to run up your count of mainspace edits. Mostly I'm concerned about the second issue; for the past couple of days now, over half of the edits on my watchlist are by you, to this article. Could you please try to combine smaller edits in the future? It's kinda one of those "unwritten customs" on WP--nobody will block you for what you're doing, but it would be helpful if you didn't. Thanks! Gladys J Cortez 06:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I responded to your comment left on my/the top of the article's top page. A lack of information about the topic within wikipedia should not be an excuse for lack of expansion, since MoS states that wikipedia articles cannot be used as references. If the southwest Pacific section, for example, is extremely short and confounding the formatting, then do some googling or visit the library and see if they have any info that could expand the related sections. Thegreatdr ( talk) 22:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I've sourced the Production and Cultural references sections in the " So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show" article you are working on. It may need some copyediting and the Links section should be like this. Otherwise it's close the GA quality. Good luck! :) -- TheLeft orium 15:35, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
by wikifying the External links section? Serendi pod ous 15:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
You know, I did ask you what you thought of a merge long before I started the FLRC. Anyway, it's one thing to oppose a merge, but there are some serious problems with both pages that I mentioned, so you really shouldn't vote "keep" until after those concerns are addressed. A FLRC isn't like a FLC, they will be delisted if issues aren't addressed, even if there is outstanding support for keeping it listed. -- Scorpion 0422 00:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello there!
You have been invited to enter C4v3m4n's Contest!.
The contest is designed to provide users with a challenge while still having fun! This month's contest is focused on Movember, a month designed to to raise awareness and funds for men's health issues, such as prostate cancer and depression in Australia and New Zealand.
Follow the link given above to find out more information. Hope to see you there!
I don't know if this the best place to respond but thanks for taking on the task of reviewing! I'll go search for a better top image: I should admit I have a degree which includes chemistry, but not biology (however that was 36 years ago). Technically, it actually seems the condition is initiated by the HO· radical, but I don't have an image of that either. Could you have a look at the refs I've provided for your fact-tags: on a couple of places I'm not sure which part of the sentence you wanted to be sourced. Finally, I can easily remove the refs from the lead (see Talk:Oxygen_toxicity#GA_suggestions) but reading WP:LEADCITE seems to suggest the opposite. Perhaps you can clarify that? Thanks -- RexxS ( talk) 04:22, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I have reviewed the article you nominated, Cultural depictions of dinosaurs, and have placed it on hold. See the review here. You have 7 days to edit it until it conforms to the Good Article criteria, but I am sure that it will be fine. Good luck! (is that a contradiction? never mind) - weebiloobil ( talk) 21:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I left some comments on the above FLC. Dabomb87 ( talk) 00:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Do you intend to make any further improvements to this article? -- Philcha ( talk) 07:33, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I am reviewing your article, So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show for GA and have left some comments on Talk:So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show/GA1 for you to address before I pass it. Basically the article is fine and close to GA. Please feel free to contact me with comments or questions. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 22:21, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal! I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that I began the GA review of History of the Roman Constitution several days ago. I have some concerns with the referencing of the article, so before I complete a thorough prose review I'd like to make sure that there are editors still interested in working on the article. Could you drop me a note, either on my talk page or on the review page, to let me know? I'm also going to drop a note on the talk page of the main editor, to let him know of my concerns. Thank you! Dana boomer ( talk) 14:17, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I've already begun prelim research on the Jupiter Trojans, so, if you want to target Exploration of Jupiter, just leave the Trojans to me and we'll have this FT up for consideration before the end of the year. Serendi pod ous 19:04, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=55_Cancri_f&diff=226925523&oldid=226921166
Nergaal (
talk)
21:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
I was interested in your suggestions on a couple of things.
GabrielVelasquez ( talk) 03:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:2008 South Ossetia war.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
Wronkiew (
talk)
16:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
|
Please don't change my formatting. I wanted a seperate heading for a reason. Pursey Talk | Contribs 22:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for reviewing my FLC. I responded to your comment. -- Goodraise ( talk) 01:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello, Nergaal | |
Congratulations for finding my hidden User page! ≈ The Haunted Angel 21:40, 4 November 2008 (UTC) |
I'm not going to withdraw this one, but I was planning on waiting before GACing it because I'm still not yet done with the 5 family members and once I finished with them I was planning on cleaning up the page a bit with facts from those pages. -- Scorpion 0422 23:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm not angry or anything in the least bit, but I would just like to say that it's usually nice to inform someone that you're nominating a FT/GT that has a majority, in some cases over 90%, of articles that they have worked to promote. Common courtesy, ya know? Like I said, I'm not angry or upset, not even a bit perturbed, but some people might be. Great job helping on the Season 4 article, and happy editing - Mastrchf ( t/ c) 02:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I am currently reviewing your article, Exploration of Jupiter, for GA and have left some comments at Talk:Exploration of Jupiter/GA1. I notice that you are doing a lot of editing today! Feel free to contact me with questions or comments. Regards, — Mattisse( Talk) 23:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Nergaal, I wanted to nominate it for FA when I have time to do so. In the next time I am not available to help. The real world is forcing me to do work there. Would have been nice if the person written most of the article would be asked befor nominating it. But ... So good luck!-- Stone ( talk) 05:41, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Your review of Peak uranium have been on hold for 32 days. Normal procedure is to fail the article after 7 days. Please finish the review. Thanks.-- MrStalker ( talk) 14:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I started reviewing Executive Magistrates of the Roman Republic which you nominated. I also notified User:RomanHistorian as he was the main content editor. Fainites barley 21:13, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I have a nitpick on your otherwise excellent "Periodic Table by Radioactivity.PNG" image. Seaborgium is not a color that is listed in the referring legends. its a pink, while the legends go orange->red->dark-red. Cheers. DavidRF ( talk) 17:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I have taken over the GA review of your article, Hafnium, as the first review does seem to be missing. I have done some copy editing and may do more, as it needs a good copy edit. You should check my editing for accuracy. Also, I have left some comments at Talk:Hafnium/GA1 and will probably add more. Please feel free to contact me with questions or comments. Regards, — Mattisse ( Talk) 19:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Good work, good help, good article!-- Stone ( talk) 22:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article
Batman (film series) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
Drilnoth (
talk)
15:10, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Heh heh, now you can add the featured pictures you nominated to that sidebar on the side of your page. <In case you didn't know, use (edit page first to see) Image:name.format>. — Ceran ♦ ( talk) 02:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Deep model Jupiter.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Shalow model Jupiter.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
The article
Batman (film series) 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:Batman (film series) for things needed to be addressed.
Drilnoth (
talk)
13:25, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Batman (film series) has passed its GA review and is now a Good Article. Remember that you can also help with articles by reviewing other articles here. - Drilnoth ( talk) 03:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Further waiting does not make any sense, so I nominated it for featured article. You are a co-nominator. Ruslik ( talk) 14:26, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I won't put the thumbnail here, but the above nomination was successful. (Insert boilerplate text here). MER-C 03:08, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Nergaal.
Thanks for giving me the heads up with the whole good topic thing; sorry I didn't get back to you earlier on the topic.
A possible GTN could end up floating around the instant after the passing of HD 40307 itself into GA status, so until then we'll just have to sit tight.
Thanks, -- Starstriker7( Dime algo or see my works) 06:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Well done on Exploration of Jupiter! Just one more article to get up, and I'm afraid it's a doozy. Getting Jupiter Trojan up to code will be a harder job than Scattered disc, which nearly broke me (that article should never have gotten a GA shield- it was never reviewed and didn't deserve one). I don't mean to be a party pooper; I know how hard you've worked to get the Jupiter topic off the ground, but the FT guys were pretty insistent that the Trojan article had to be included, either as part of the Jupiter subtopic or as part of the main topic. Serendi pod ous 18:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
SandyGeorgia: but the article appears to be within criteria now. I think this means it is featured now.-- Stone ( talk) 23:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I notice that you created {{ FTC-icon}}. Would you be in favour of replacing its image with a candidate version I have just made? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Slightly gone off my radar. Hope to get round to it in the course of the week. Looking better though. Fainites barley scribs 21:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I think I've gotten all the production information available from the DVD. -- TheLeft orium 22:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I've reviewed the article Equestrian order for its nomination for Good Article status. I have some major concerns about referencing along with others concerns, so I am placing the article on hold for seven days. My complete review may be found here. If you have any questions about the review or individual issues I have raised, please note them on the review page (which is on my watchlist) and I will answer them there. When you have addressed the issues I have mentioned, I will be happy to reevaluate the nomination. Thanks, and good editing. — Bellhalla ( talk) 17:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your advices. I think I’m gonna expand the lower part of the map in order to have more space for the legend. What is wrong with the placement of "Nashville"? The state borders of the displyed area are the same today as in 1864. Why do I need to mention the year? Regards, Andrei nacu( talk) 19:11, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Review done. Fainites barley scribs 15:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Last few bits to do. Fainites barley scribs 18:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
You haven't been around my neck of the woods recently. I was wondering if you were interested in collaborating with me on Jupiter Trojan Serendi pod ous 01:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I just noticed that you nominated these two articles: USS Alaska (CB-1) and USS Hawaii (CB-3). I feel that these nominations might be premature since the primary author is not done and he is on a semi-wikibreak for the holidays. It may be best to withdraw these noms and let Ed complete the articles first. As an editor who focuses on these type of articles I am certain that the articles are incomplete and one of them even lacks some references and is not even close to GA status. Of course, you're free to do what you wish, and this is just a friendly heads-up. - MBK 004 01:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
You can work on it if you want to. I probably won't get anything done anyway. -- Maitch ( talk) 06:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Take a look at my review. Rockk3r Spit it Out! 20:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I "supported" the list now. Good job bro. Rockk3r Spit it Out! 03:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Congrats. Nice article. Fainites barley scribs 20:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Are you planning on solving it? Because I certainly can't, and the only person I know who could is Ruslik and he's too busy right now. Serendi pod ous 00:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Feel free to contribute to the conversation, since it will likely impact if/when the article gets reviewed for, let alone reaches, GA. Your input would be appreciated. Thegreatdr ( talk) 01:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)