User talk:Miller17CU94/Archive 19

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

Archive information from April 24 to July 6, 2010.

IUPAC

I have gone through your suggestions on the IUPAC page for the GA review. Let me know what you think. Also, if there is anything else you think needs done before it goes off of hold let me know. Thanks for the good review and excellent catch on the non-printing thing. Salamakajakawaka (talk) 22:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Yay. GA. Thanks for the review.

Battle of Netherlands

Hi Chris, I am quite sure all fixes were done on Battle of Netherlands (Please let us know if anything was missed). The review is at Talk:Battle of the Netherlands/GA2. Please let me know your decision. Thanks. Diannaa TALK 05:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. Thanks for all your work on this review!! Diannaa TALK 13:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive

GAN backlog elimination drives chart up to 1 May

On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, I'd like to especially thank you for your efforts over this past month's GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a complete success, which hopefully results in more expedient good article reviews, increasing users' confidence in the good article nomination processes. Even if you made just a small contribution, it still helped contribute to the success of this drive. Here is what we have accomplished this last month in this drive.

  • 661 total nominations were reviewed. 541 of them passed (~81.8%), 97 (~14.7%) failed, and 23 (~3.5%) ended on hold.
  • The WP:GAN page started at 110,126 bytes length on 1 April and ended at 43,387 bytes length at the end of 30 April (a 66,739 byte reduction in the page, about 60.6% less).
  • Excluding extremes, the longest wait for someone's GAN to be review was about 11.5 weeks at the beginning. (I mistook the figure when I reported to the Signpost that it was 13.) At the end, with the exception of one that was relisted, the longest wait is now at 10 days.
  • 63 different users participated, each having completed at least one GAN, with others also having helped out behind-the-scenes in making the drive a success.
  • The drive started with 463 GA nominations remaining and 388 unreviewed. At the end of the month, we ended with 89 remaining (374 or about 80.8% less) and 47 unreviewed (341 or about 87.9% less).

For those who have accomplished certain objectives in the drive, awards will be coming shortly. Again, thank you for your help in the drive, and I hope you continue to help review GA nominations and overall improve the quality of articles here on Wikipedia.

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Telecoms

Sure thing - happy to be of help. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:53, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010

Birmingham Americans

Thank you for your thorough GA review of my work on the Birmingham Americans article. I believe I have addressed all of your concerns and would appreciate it very much if you could see if these fixes, changes, and new articles are sufficient to your needs. Thanks again. - Dravecky (talk) 10:32, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I've said it before but here I am to say it again: Thank you! - Dravecky (talk) 18:04, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

GAN backlog elimination drive award

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For reviewing 11 good article nominations during the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive, I hereby present you The Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Good work! –MuZemike 23:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Proto-Indo-European root

Thanks for reviewing my GA nomination. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Cheers, ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 16:40, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Mythmaker GA review

Thanks for the review. I made some changes. Torchiest (talk | contribs) 20:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

It passed. Good job. Chris (talk) 20:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Torchiest (talk | contribs) 21:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Help

Just thought I would thank you for linking me to those pages. They explained much to me, hopefully I can help better many articles here on Wikipedia. Thanks Again. User:Sami50421 User talk:Sami50421 —Preceding undated comment added 21:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC).

Thanks for reviewing Strip club article

I appreciate the feedback. Agree with most. Did have one comment about the lack of reference feedback for some of the sections. The Wikipedia criteria isn't that every section needs a reference, but that content needs to be verifiable. The sections you mentioned can be easily verified simply by walking into one of a thousand clubs (or scanning around to find an article to match if common knowledge isn't sufficient). Will continue to work on it. Also, agree that impact of working in a strip club merits attention. It is being written into another article. You can preview it here. The large blocks of quoted text can be ignored. They're just placeholders to be summarized and cited along with other content to be added. Thanks. Wallanon (talk) 13:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Saw your reply on my talk page. Thanks. Don't know enough about how all the templates work to type a reply there and have you get notified. Appreciate the tip about getting an article to FA. Hadn't really considered that. Was just trying to fix an article in need of help that I knew a little bit about. Know the article is a little on the long side, but it would be great if you could do another once over after your recommended changes get in. May take me a few days, though, since I am trying to get another article ready to post. Thanks again. Wallanon (talk) 13:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010

Duquesne Basketball GA Review

Thanks for the review. I'm working through some of the fixes now. As far as the references, most of the ones you mentioned are online now, but the site they link to was down a lot over the past day or two. I assume that's where you got the deadlinks from. The first two are still unavailable though. I didn't add them myself but I'll have to see if I can find them. And for the Dayton game image, that 2005 date is the date assigned to the picture by my digital camera and carried over onto Wikipedia, even though it was taken on 2/21/10. Daniel Kemp (talk) 17:27, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I've Done Work On It

I got your message. If you look at the article I have done a lot of work on it. I have went through your review list, and tried to fix it to the best of my advantage. There's a lot of history in the show, but I managed to work out a lot of the issues. The header is now expanded to four paragraphs, covering the basics of each section. The references was the hardest, a lot of things weren't reliable. That is fixed, and all of the publishers are now italicized. Basically everything you suggested, I did. If there's anything else I can do, let me know. I am willing to put in the effort for it. Thanks. User:Sami50421 Sami50421 (talk) 21:13, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Academic All-America GAC

I have addressed your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

GA review for HIStory

Reply. Crystal Clear x3 04:45, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010

Invitation

The Paralympics Task Force Invitation!

You are cordially invited to join the Paralympics Task Force!
You appear to be someone that may be interested in joining the Paralympics Task Force. Please accept this formal invitation from a current member of the project.

We offer a place for you to connect with users who also like the Paralympic Games and facilitate team work in the development of Paralympic Games articles.

If you decide to join the project, please add your name to this list.
I hope you accept! - ~~~ 
Bib (talk) 10:33, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 31 May 2010

FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 2015

Cool, thanks for appreciating it :) I felt a bit silly using the presented twitters as a source, but decided it was best to add the information anyway. It's good to get positive feedback every once in a while. You'll always encounter negative feedback from time to time, so some positive feedback helps to keep the motivation up :P Lejman (talk) 02:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Institute of Food Technologists

Hello!

I noticed you have made some edits on the IFT wiki over the years. I am new to Wikipedia, and I need to replace IFT's logo with its new one, but I do not yet have auto rights. Can you please help me? Dlabinger (talk) 18:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Neighborhoods of Knoxville

1. Halls is Halls Crossroads, Tennessee, and is located outside of Knoxville.
2. "North," "South," "East," and "West" Knoxville are not "neighborhoods," they're large sections of the city that contain multiple neighborhoods.
3. Island Home Park, Lincoln Park, and Ridgedale are neighborhoods recognized by Knoxville, and should be included.

City-data.com is not a reliable source for this sort of thing. Please see Knoxville's Office of Neighborhoods page for a better source. Bms4880 (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Moved discussion to Template_talk:Knoxneighborhoods. Bms4880 (talk) 15:27, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Canoeing vs kayaking

Hi Chris, I see you have started/contributed to quite a few canoists' pages. I am unsure whether some of the pages really refer to kayakers as opposed to canoeists. For instance, Steinar Amundsen was a kayaker, not a canoeist. I could be mistaken, though, since in my language we distinguish between those two paddling disciplines. A canoe has an open hull, whereas a kayak usually has a deck and a cockpit. Also a canoe is most often paddled with a single bladed paddle wherea a kayak is usually paddled with a double bladed paddle.

Best regards, and sorry if I created unneccessary confusion. --Teodor605 (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 2010

GA review of Brander Spencer

Thanks for doing the review. The suggestions definitely helped to improve the article.radek (talk) 19:02, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of David C. Chapman

Hello! Your submission of David C. Chapman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Quasihuman (talk) 20:05, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK credits for David C. Chapman

Materialscientist (talk) 12:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

You have been granted the 'reviewer' userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. –xenotalk 13:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

GA review of Shimer College

Thanks for agreeing to review the article. I look forward to your comments. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 14:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and good direction. It made the article better. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 22:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 2010

GA review for Tom Peterson

Chris, thank you very much for reviewing the Tom Peterson article. Glad to know I am very close; I can answer all of your questions and will do so this weekend. Quick question, though, as it's my first time going through the GA process: when I have comments, is it best to append them to your last comment on the Review page? If I don't hear from you in the meantime, that's what I'll do. Cheers, WWB (talk) 14:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I just saw, and looks like it's already brought more editorial attention to the article. Very cool. Thanks again! WWB (talk) 19:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 June 2010

Speedy deletion nomination of Lev Nikitin

A tag has been placed on Lev Nikitin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. magnius (talk) 19:39, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Just a note to say that I've declined this speedy deletion tag and removed it from the article. To the best of my knowledge, all Olympic athletes meet the requirements of WP:ATHLETE. Accounting4Taste:talk 19:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Anatoliy Tymoshchuk

You reviewed the Anatoliy Tymoshchuk on June 12, 2010 and let it fail for GA. Fair enough but I would appreciate if you would give some suggestions on its talkpage for improving the article, so editors can start to improve it. The article looks referenced enough to me. — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 14:05, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I see. Good reason! Thanks! — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 14:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
I've have this grievance with assesors not writing anything at all when assessing Good Article nomination. You should still write an overall assesment even though it meets the criteria of a quick fail. Kingjeff (talk) 20:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
That is not the point. How are articles suppose to improve if, reviewers like yourself, just say pass or fail? Kingjeff (talk) 21:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

For the record, the Why articles are nominated for Good article status section states "Occasionally nominations are made by editors who happen to discover an article that they believe is good quality, but the vast majority are made by editors who have spent extensive time working on the nominated article. Such editors have an emotional stake in the article and are usually interested in continuing to improve it." Therefore, it a courtesy thing. Kingjeff (talk) 21:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

First of all, the template might be outdated for this paticular article. Second of all, is that the only thing wrong with it? All the template means is that there is a guarantee of writing about 1 thing. Kingjeff (talk) 21:40, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Request

Chris, let me disclose that I am participating in the WikiCup, and that is the primary motivation for the request below. I apologize in advance for my shamelessness. You reviewed San Antonio Bay several months back. Could you take a look at Corpus Christi Bay, which has been listed at GAC for almost a month? --William S. Saturn (talk) 03:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

SC 291

Other than my SC road map, the only other map of SC 291 I know of is on Google Maps. Cyndaquazy (talk) 01:15 UTC, 27 June 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 June 2010

Piraeus

Excuse me, could you please tell me why you add venues-categories to Piraeus? - Sthenel (talk) 21:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not talking about this. These categories are for venues, not cities! - Sthenel (talk) 21:11, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for South Carolina Highway 291

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miller17CU94/Archive_19&oldid=1141466401"