User talk:4u1e/archive5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peer review for Jack Warner

Hi 4u1e, I saw your name on the list of volunteers for peer review. I just nominated a piece on movie mogul Jack Warner. The article includes a good deal of information, and it's reasonably engaging, but I know it can be improved. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 15:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the copy editing! If you feel there are any general weakenesses in the article, please don't hesitate to let me know. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 18:08, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks 4ule, I just returned to my computer, and I haven't had a chance to give your comments the close reading they deserve. At a glance, they struck me as reasonable and constructive. I'll respond in detail ASAP. Thanks, again, for your time and consideration! Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 04:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Not at all! You're comments were just what was needed. By the way, another reviewer just recommended that I tone down references to Warner's personal life in the lead and slightly reorganize the sections on his professional life. If you have time, I'd appreciate any comments on these relatively minor changes. Either way, thanks, once again, for your thoughtful and thorough critique. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 20:18, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I wrote: "Kulwicki was buried in his family plot at Saint Adalbert Cemetery in Milwaukee, consistent with other Polish Americans in the cemetery." Would you help me with wording this sentence? What I was trying to accomplish is saying where he was buried, and to add that he is buried in a family plot. These family plots were done by people with Polish ancestry. Twelsht has commented that more Polish American things probably should be added to the article, and this is a great place to add a comment to reinforce that thought.

I went to the cemetery to take the picture of his gravestone, and I found out that his family's stone has listed around 10 family members including his mother and brother. This portion of the cemetery is a Polish American portion, and has several family plots like his families. Any thoughts about how to reword this so its less confusing? Royalbroil 00:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request - Lancia LC2

I was wondering if it might be possible for you to give a quick peer review of my Lancia LC2 article as I'm considering nominating it for GA. Mostly just looking for another pair of eyes to see anything I may have stupidly missed or anything that you think might make for a better read. I know it isn't the usual F1 stuff, but not all that different. Thanks in advance. The359 (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

hey!

Well, I have only delivered the Newsletter to a few as a trial run, and I didn't have time to get a bot to do it. Well, I have two that are interested in helping in this project. These are Chubbinator and Diniz. Thank you for subscribing, could you sign your name on the sign list here -> Wikipedia:WikiProject Formula One/Newsletter

Thanks for your interest! LB22 (talk to me!)Email me! 18:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

With appreciation

The WikiProject Films Award
I, twelsht (talk) 08:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC), hereby award 4u1e the WikiProject Films Award for his/her valued contibutions to WikiProject Films. Thank you for your assistance on Jack Warner.
Awarded 08:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


Issue 2

Welcome to Issue 2!

Copyright material - Arth.R2

Hello, 4u1e

Just to get things right this time, can I rewrite GrandPrix.com material in order to use it? Do you know any other good Internet references? I am really interested in improving the race reviews.

Thank you.

Arth.R2 (talk) 14:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


Your rewrite of Saruman

Damn good job is all I have to say. Dr. eXtreme 18:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Edit conflict

No worries - you got most of them. DH85868993 (talk) 01:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi 4u1e, This message is to inform you that I recently nominated Jack Warner as a featured article candidate. Your comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, again, for your extremely detailed review of the article! Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 09:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

McLaren brakes

Hmmm. Could just be. My recollection was that they had been used for only one GP, but even that wouldn't preclude their having been spotted in testing at the end of the previous year. First Google result gives the BBC report [4], which gets the issues spectacularly wrong anyway - it was left/right not front/back, and the accusation was four wheel steering, not four wheel drive. Have to look for some cite of the journalist story, I suppose. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 18:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

This [5] says it was at the 'Ring the previous year, so I guess 1997 it is. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 18:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Next NW (Early)

This is early for reasons LB22 and I understand.

Max Mosley

Hi hope your well.

I nominated it for FA, fingers crossed! Shame there is no picture of the man himself. I had a go at the final section on the 2007 season could you take a look? Cheers!

Tommy turrell (talk) 23:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, good idea have added a comment to the discussion page. Tommy turrell (talk) 12:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Mark83 (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Requesting peer review of Facebook

I noticed that you listed yourself as a volunteer for "Applied sciences and technology" subjects for peer review. I am requesting a peer review from you for Wikipedia:Peer review/Facebook/archive2, if you have the time. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 18:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Facebook is currently nominated for a WP:GA at Wikipedia:Good article nominations#Computing, so if you have time, please review it. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 20:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, 4u1e. I am going to nominate the Oil shale and Oil shale extraction articles for FAC. As the last peer reviews of these articles were not very productive, I wonder if you agree to take a look and give some advice and hard critics before proceeding with the FAC nomination? Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 19:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, 4u1e. Thank you very much for reviewing the Oil shale article. It achieved FA status and your review was a great help in this process. I would like to ask also reviewing the Oil shale extraction article. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 19:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer review idea

Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog.

There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).

If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Thanks for agreeing to help. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
    • I made some suggestions at the Saruman peer review - hope they are helpful (one less person to guilt this way ;-) ) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi 4u1e, Thanks, once again, for your detailed feedback and support! Your comments certainly helped me to improve the article, and I wanted to let you know that it was just promoted to FA status. With appreciation, -- twelsht (talk) 04:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley

Happy to do it! I'm turning in at the moment. But I'll be on it tomorrow. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk)

I admire your dedication to the sport! By the way, I printed up a copy of the article last night and read it this afternoon. It a great piece! Most of the things I caught were minor style issues, e.g., inconsistent rendering of numbers and inconsistent comma usage. One thing: Despite the fact that Mosley eschewed a career in politics, it might be interesting to know if he evolved in this department. Has he commented at all on his father's pre-war political career, or is this a subject he avoids? This isn't central to the story, of course, but it might be an interesting tidbit. I'll join the FAC momentarily. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 01:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all! The article was an interesting introduction to a figure I knew nothing about. I'll review the piece later today. If anything else comes to mind, I'll let you know. Best, -- twelsht (talk) 14:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Just wanted to draw your attention to constructive comments made by mark83 on the Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Max_Mosley#Max_Mosley page. I have had a go at some of them but I would be greatful if you could review them. Cheers (happy easter btw) Tommy turrell (talk) 18:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton

Thanks 4u1e! Taht was v. helpful Will (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Requesting peer review of PHP

I noticed that you listed yourself as a volunteer for "Applied sciences and technology" subjects for peer review. I am requesting a peer review from you for Wikipedia:Peer review/PHP/archive2, if you have the time. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 21:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank You!

Thank You!!
Thank you for helping me improve the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix article, by provding feedback on the article through it's recent Peer Review. Your feedback has been used to improve the article's quality. As a result, I have nominated it for GA status with the hope that it will pass. Thank you!

D.M.N. (talk) 21:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not in the genre of articles you're into, so if you don't want to review it, I totally understand. Trust. Just dropping a request, as I'm going for FA. Thanks for your consideration. Regards, LaraLove 05:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Copy edit request: Max Mosley

Thanks for the message on my talk page -- I will try to take a look at it this evening.  – ukexpat (talk) 19:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Response

From a quick look through the discussion and the problem I noticed, I would have to agree with your concerns about copyright. The issues I have usually dealth with have been fairly clear cut, copying of large chunks of encylopaedic text, which can clearly be written in many different ways. Obviously this is is a bit different since as it's from a specific law, rewording it is not necessarily easily but I agree simply copying it in the way that was done, particularly given that this is an English translation (of a French translation?) of an Armenian law is probably not acceptable. However I don't have the time at the moment to look into it in depth, I'll try tomorrow. In the mean time, you may want to consider asking at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems to see what others say. Nil Einne (talk) 10:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

FA

Hi,

Thanks for your help with rongorongo. It's now up for FA, if you wish to comment.[6] — kwami (talk) 01:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Get ready for a huge vandalism storm, in case you haven't seen the front page of todays News of The World, there's not a very nice headline involving Mosley. Someone's left a comment on the very bottom of the talkpage about it. This will almost certainly affect the FA-nom. D.M.N. (talk) 13:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It's been Fully-Protected. Looks like it'll fail, with things coming out beyond our control. What a shame... D.M.N. (talk) 17:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Ah well, never mind it was a good attempt! I am pleased with the work that everyone had done on the article up to now. I think the detail added to it over the last 6 months to make it fair and balanced really helped keep both the pro and anti Mosley sides happy.
personally I’m not going to edit it (assuming it becomes unprotected) until there is a source such as ITV, BBC or possibly autosport that is prepared to touch this story.
I have to say I am fascinated to see if it turns out to be true!
I’m not sure how I feel about many journalists just resorting to cutting and pasting max’s history from his wikipedia entry!
BTW good work on finding more info about his political ambisions.Tommy turrell (talk) 18:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Yea, it's sad that the bad timing of this incident has killed this article's changes at Featured Article. Either of you 2 should leave me a message on my talk page if you have have some changes and I'll see that they get done. The admin mop thingie allows me to bypass the full protection if I can improve the article.
It was tough reading those last few FA comments about how horrible the article's writing is. I don't believe it's bad. I'm getting nervious about proposing Alan Kulwicki for FA if the comments are going to be that rough. Royalbroil 03:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Well that was bad timing! Still, I can't deny the relevance of the story, given there's a good chance it will end his time as FIA president.
Regarding cut and pasting by journalists: they're violating Wikipedia's copyright provisions if they do so. Not by copying, since Wikipedia's content is free to use, but by not acknowledging the source, and because under the GFDL license, if you copy Wiipedia's content into your work, the resulting work must be licensed under the GFDL. I'll be surprised if any of the newspapers have done that. Having said that, at a first glance I didn't see any direct lifts, other than quotes.
Regarding the FA comments on writing, it's all part of the process. Laserbrain's are all pretty minor stuff, and a fair few of them are unfamiliarity with the topic (Hyphenated 'March-BMW' is of course completely normal usage in this context, for example!). Tony's are probably more serious, and tougher to fix, but he is usually correct, so it's best to just learn from the experience! 4u1e (talk) 08:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Pity about the timing; my responses at my talk. Tony (talk) 10:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
After sleeping on it, you two have too many changes and you should do them yourself so that you can get exactly what you want. The whole "no deadline" thing. I can't wait to see how the whole "Nazi Orgy" incident will be worded. I didn't hear anything about the controversy here in the U.S., but it's easy to find on google. Royalbroil 14:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Tony has written this gem and several others on his user page. Almost everyone needs to work on these areas. It probably would be a good thing for me to eventually nominate the Kulwicki article because taking some lumps would lead to me improving my writing skills! Royalbroil 17:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you remember Serp91? have a read of http://www.welt.de/sport/article1860738/Der_Brief_des_Fia-Praesidenten_im_Wortlaut.html and draw your own conclusions ;-) Tommy turrell (talk) 17:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I thought the language use of the legal system where quite simmilar! I'm kinda going by what Mosley said about reading the blogs! But I could be quite wrong.
re "the embarrassment the revelations caused" - good call.Tommy turrell (talk) 12:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! I will get a review up for it this week. I have been having to deal with some family issues lately.

--Tlayden (talk) 18:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I have been expecting that User:Zenlax will do the review since he/she called it. There's no better training for reviewing a GAN than improving a different article to GAN. Tlayden has <50 edits total. Besides, the first person to call it should be doing the review according to the GAN rules. Royalbroil 18:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, Zenlax read it and changed it to GA without comment. Thank you for your mentorship and review on this article! I'm thinking about FA for the article. Do you think that the sources would be criticized since none are book sources and many are not paper? I have at least 3 more people willing to review it. Royalbroil 14:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your hints and thoughts about the article's potential at FA. I asked because I was concerned about the some of the same issues that you brought up.
I started another article (Eddie Hill) that I think almost already hit GA standards when it was originally started. I notice that the article has many redlinks on topics that should have been written a long time ago. Apparently there are no fans of drag racing who are Wikipedians. I'd be doing a large stretch if I started those articles because I don't have much background in drag racing. I know they're the big events but that's about all that I know. I probably don't know enough to make a stub; I could make a few sentences . Have you seen any GA articles with many redlinks? Royalbroil 02:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It's Pflanzgarten again - one of the anons was already flagged as a sock. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 21:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

F1 newsletter 20080403

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Toyota

well was a tad unfair that you did all the work! The Toyota issue isn't something i know much about, it didn't seem to generate much coverage. Max is taking up too much of my day job, I am thinking about moving on to Jean Todt or Ron Dennis (my dark horse tip for the next president! of the FIA). Anything else in the project that you have seen that is important but doesn't have much wikipedia coverage? But ideally i'd like see Max to FA first.Tommy turrell (talk) 17:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Frank Williams looks neglected a bit too. Lotus, intresting, had nearly as much tech chucked out of f1 as McLaren! Lotus was my fav team when i was a kid, I used to have a poster of a Lotus 107 on my bedroom wall! Lotus could be difficult to seprate from Chapman though. Fango - bit before my time! Ok will give it somethought Tommy turrell (talk) 18:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
ok will do, is that the chap that used to be chummy with burnie? Didn't he run one of his mags? or maybe i am thinkin of someone else. Tommy turrell (talk) 18:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Good spot, don't notice the 300m, sounds a bit fancyful to me! it also refrers to "the first three years of Max Mosley’s life were spent in Holloway prison" but this isn't true according to "my life" by Oswald Mosley so i am sure there is lots of grounds for keeping it out.Tommy turrell (talk) 09:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Dirty Dancing Peer Review

Hi, I saw your name at WP:PRV. If you're available, I'd appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Peer review/Dirty Dancing. Thanks, Elonka 12:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Brabham BT19 photo

Rolf Stommelen, Brabham BT45, 1976 German GP

Hello again! I've just found this freely-licensed photo of a BT19 on display at the 2006 Australian GP. Might it be any use to the article?-- Diniz (talk) 08:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll upload it soon. I've also just found a new Brabham image on the Commons, which could be integrated into the team's article.-- Diniz (talk) 09:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded and available here.-- Diniz (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley, in reply

Hi, I added a reply on the talk page; thanks for including me. Wikimancer (talk) 22:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Interview of sorts?

I was wondering if I could interview you over email for my paper on collaborative writing on Wikipedia (I'm hoping to present it at Wikimania). I need a broader range of editors than I currently have and your experience writing about sports would be helpful! Awadewit (talk) 17:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Another WikiCommons Brabham image

Nelson Piquet, Brabham BT49C, 1981 Monaco Grand Prix.

I've just found an image of Nelson Piquet at the 1981 Monaco Grand Prix on the Commons, for your editing pleasure... ;)-- Diniz (talk) 13:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Nominate for F1POM & F1DOM

YOU can nominate for the F1 picture of the month here and F1 driver of the month here. Chubbennaitor 18:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi 4u1e. As someone who has got a motor racing article to FA status, I was wondering whether you could peer review the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix article for me. Could you possibly make comments on the article at the PR discussion here. Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 17:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

A request

Hey there 4 - Just wondering if you could help me with some pronounciations (sp?). I am planning to make Brabham a spoken article via me and I was wondering if you could help me if some of these words:

  • Ron Tauranac - Just the surname.
  • Joachim Luhti - Surname as well.
  • l'Automobile
  • Rapier
  • perilously
  • Andrea de Adamich

Anyway, if you could just clear them up it would be much appreciated. Cheers. --Phill talk Edits Review this GA review! 15:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks 4 (and thanks RB if he sees this!) for the help. Btw, I though I'd be pronouncing the FIA bit like Italian because I'm very comfortable pronouncing Italian words although I'm not sure about French! :-p. --Phill talk Edits Review this GA review! 20:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Danica

Howdy! I didn't actually put the original NPOV box up there, just changed it to a NPOV-section box. I would guess that the section is considered non-nuetral by some as the tone sometimes seems deriding at times, probably owing to the fact that many of the cited articles/topics in the section are of a deriding/controversial nature. Obvisouly pretty girls can't racce ;) ZueJay (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like User:RossF18 added the original NPOV tag. ZueJay (talk) 03:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

What to do?

I have 2 reliable sources that contradict each other. One is a book, published my Macmillan, that consists of quotes from either the racer or someone close to them. In this case, the chapter is written by Alan Kulwicki's crew chief Paul Andrews (NASCAR). He says that Zerex backed out as sponsor at the beginning of the 1990 season. SpeedwayMedia backs him up, although it is not necessarily very reliable. Multiple other reliable sources, including Speed Channel and RacingReference.com say that they left after the 1990 season. Royalbroil 13:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a great answer. I'll do more digging. There are one or two other things that have made me wonder, so I appreciate both the specific and generic answers. I don't see a certain source that consistently wrong (or shows a pattern). That is, except for the Motorsports Hall of Fame of America, which I've found to have wrong information on several different articles. I use the article carefully. I would only use it in Kulwicki's article to source that he was inducted in their Hall of Fame (if he ever becomes inducted). That's all we were able to use it for in Mario Andretti's article. Royalbroil 17:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request

Hello. I noticed that you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer in the area of sports. I would like comments on an article I have recently put up for review, SummerSlam (1988). Any help is appreciated, so if you have some time, I'd appreciate your comments here. Thanks so much! If you are not interested in reviewing the article, please ignore this message. Nikki311 22:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Max

I've added in a couple of points about this weekends goings on (Israel and Ecclestone). Just wondered if you would check (and copy edit) my posts. I was wary about putting anything (I am hardly Mosleys biggest fan, after all) but figured I'd have a go and see. Narson (talk) 20:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I loathe him as head of the FIA but I kind of think the FIA is getting what it asked for by appointing the man. Considering who Ecclestone is pushing for his replacement, it will all be business as normal anyway. Maybe if he stays around, we might get to see some more names tossed into the ring for next years vote? But yeah, the section is getting larger and well, I can see it getting larger still when the campaigning starts ahead of the June 3rd vote. I can see Mercedes sport trying to scupper him after that 'No you are the Nazis' response. Narson (talk) 09:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Ron Dennis would have made a good replacement, sadly thats not going to happen. Could always get Damon Hill in ;) Narson (talk) 09:19, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

WPF1

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi 4u1e. Two people at the current FAC suggested a "comma check" should take place. Could you possibly run through the article, and add or remove any commas which you feel should or should not be there. Thanks! D.M.N. (talk) 20:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Peer review/Copyedit

Hello. I'm looking for a copyedit/peer review on the solar energy page and your name came recommended by Beagel. I'd appreciate any and all help. Mrshaba (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Get down with your real life self. I know how it is. Thanks for the note. Mrshaba (talk) 14:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I've gone through the article and improved every ref that I could to more reliable sources. That caused me to find more material to expand the article. For the remaining items sourced by the "less than ideal" sources, I don't think that they are controversial so they probably won't even need to be sourced. I might remove them otherwise. I'll do a spell check and final reading, then I think it's ready for FAC. Would you recommend a second peer review? Either way, would you look it over again at the FA level, especially the statements sourced by "less than ideal" sources? Thanks for your copyediting and guidance! Royalbroil 15:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

F1POM and F1DOM

You can vote for the Formula One Picture of the Month/Driver of the Month at User talk:Chubbennaitor/F1POM and User talk:Sage Callahan/F1DOM. We really need your votes as the last picture and driver was decided. Chubbennaitor 07:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Rongorongo, again

Hi 4u1e,

Rongorongo is up for FAC again. I'd appreciate your input, if you have the time. kwami (talk) 09:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for Peer Review help

Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I am contacting you for your thoughts as you are one of the principal contributors to this article. As you may or may not know, it has been nominated by PheonixRMB as a featured article candidate. The FAC is not going too well, with the current consensus being that the nomination is premature and that much work needs to done to get it up to the requisite standard. I would be grateful if you would express an opinion on the article's FAC candidacy page. As FAC is currently desperately short of reviewers, withdrawing the article – and thus saving reviewer time and effort – would be one option. Thanks for your time, --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

No action now needed as PheonixRMB has withdrawn the nomination. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thingmen

I have completed annother bit of re-writing. The more I delve into this, the more confusing it becomes, as 'Thingmen' seems to have also been used to refer to viking feudal overlords. There are also multiple stories over the unit. Anyway, rather than totally toss away all that was there, as someone had obviously done alot fo work (though only using scandanavian sources for the most part it seems), I /think/ I've got it to a good state and will port it over. What do you think? Oh, it is at User:Narson/Thingmen Narson (talk) 18:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (June)