User talk:SMasters/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Lord Ashfield

Thanks for the GA review and your helpful additions. --DavidCane (talk) 13:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

No problems. Thanks for all your hard work and congratulations on the GA. :-) -- S Masters (talk) 04:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Captions

I thought you might like to be able to quote the rule on captions in your reviews. The rule is that whole sentences require ending punctuation, while sentence fragments should not have ending punctuation. See Wikipedia:MOS#Formatting_of_captions. Please forgive me if I am butting in. Best wishes, Xtzou (Talk) 14:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

No problems, and good suggestion. I will do that in future. -- S Masters (talk) 14:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Monetary Policy Committee/GA1

I have attempted to bring the article in line with your comments, which really were very minor. I know you've got a race going on there at GAN but they were the sort of thing I've seen reviewers fix themselves in the past. Ditto "I will allow up to seven days for these issues to be fixed"; I am not sure editors respond very well to that sort of language. But anyway, I have sorted the article. I tried two columns but the sole effect was a really cluttering of the article, so I decided against it. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:38, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it is has nothing to do with the GAN challenge. I feel that it is better for editors to know what the issues are, so that they can look out for them in the future. For example, I helped one editor work through her GA for a music album. It took quite a few days but we got it done and passed eventually. Since then, she has put in another two GANs, and both were approved very quickly because her experience of the first article meant that she now knows what issues need to be addressed. So, it's a win-win situation for everyone. As for the seven days wording, I picked this up from other editors when I was learning to do GANs. I guess this stems from the fact that a reviewer has a choice of whether they want to pass or fail a GAN on the spot, or put it On Hold. It is an option. I have done more than 30 GANs now and so far, no one has raised this point. Remember that the vast majority of reviewers are there to help make articles better. Please assume Good Faith. However, I can see how some editors may take that the wrong way, and I will word the On Hold situation differently next time. Thanks for your comments and suggestions, and I will have a look at your article soon. Cheers. -- S Masters (talk) 04:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Winchester 1200 GAN

Hi this is mzwhiz21, thanks again for reviewing my article in such a timely manner! I believe I added the template to the discussion page but if that is not right please let me know. I still am trying to figure out this whole process because I am new to wikipedia and the GAN. Let me know if I need to do anything else. Thanks!!Mzwhiz21 (talk) 18:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

No problems. I see you have placed the template there. I will be reviewing it in within the next day or so. :-) -- S Masters (talk) 04:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I have fixed the three citations you asked me to look at and I believe I fixed the works cited section you were referring too. If there still is something I have overlooked or done wrong, just let me know and I'll go over it again. Thanks again for all of your help with the review!Mzwhiz21 (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm... It's not quite fixed yet. What I meant about the wikilinks is that you should wikify magazine group, the barrel assembly, bayonet group, etc. (Be careful that they do not lead to a disambiguation page). Also, for the references, if possible, it should have the author's name (like the one from Washington Post). WP:REF shows you the format that is required. Let me know if you have any more questions. Cheers. -- S Masters (talk) 15:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoops! I kinda forgot about the wikilinks. I'll get right on that and the references.Mzwhiz21 (talk) 19:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I think I worked all the kinks out of the citations. Let me know if there is anything still left unresolved. Thanks!Mzwhiz21 (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I have went through and fixed all of the references and citations. I think its ready to be reviewed again. The only thing I question is if it is redundant of me to post the works cited section when the reference list is the same thing. Thanks!Mzwhiz21 (talk) 17:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the good article review! I really do appreciate that speediness of the whole process and want to thank you again for passing it! You did a wonderful job in assisting me through the whole process.-Mzwhiz21 (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Winchester Model 1897 GAN

Hey this is Rubyt38, thanks a lot for reviewing my article. I think I have addressed and fixed everything that you asked. I basically went through and did my citations over again. I believe its all ready for you again. However, if there is something that I missed just let me know and I will fix it ASAP. Thanks again for taking the time to review it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rubyt38 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the GA Review. Your comments really helped out a lot. I also wanted to thank you for doing all of this so fast. The semester is quickly coming to an end and this needed to be done so it means a lot that you addressed the article right away. Thanks again for all your time. Rubyt38 (talk) 17:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Section 116 of the Australian Constitution/GA1

Hi there, just dropping a note to say I've responded to you GA review on the review page. Thanks very much for doing this review so promptly. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:39, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I have passed it. Thanks for all your hard work! :-) -- S Masters (talk) 04:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again!--Mkativerata (talk) 04:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Mount St. Peter Church

Hi SMasters, Thanks for the heads up on this one, I was slightly suspicious because there was a GAfailed template and two GAN templates on the talk page, all dating from this month; and little in the way of corrective actions. I also saw your review and some possible copyvios (which went yesterday). It turns out to be a student project that was submitted now, in the expectation of a long wait for a review; and they were caught out(?). See you at the finish line, I hope to have 40 reviews in (but not necessarily passes or non-passes) by this weekend. I hope your's go well too. Pyrotec (talk) 07:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

You might want to look at Alejo Carpentier nominated under literature, I failed it first time round, but looks like they have improved it. Anotehr student project, i think. they made a mess of renominating, but I sorted that out. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 10:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I will have a look at it. -- S Masters (talk) 14:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I passed it eventually, after much removal of excess prose (but some subsections are still a bit flabby). Pyrotec (talk) 18:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Munch

Jezhotwells has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

–– Jezhotwells (talk) 10:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zagreb Synagogue

Hello, SMasters. You have new messages at Laurinavicius's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (NES)

I believe that I have addressed your comments in the GA Review. Please let me know if there is anything else! Canadian Paul 21:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I have replied on the GA page. -- S Masters (talk) 05:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

RE: Acid Tongue

Sorry, I have been busy. I will be working on the article. XL XR2 (talk) 22:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, let's try and wrap this up this week if possible. Thanks for letting me know. -- S Masters (talk) 06:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I have attempted to improve the article and bring it to GA status. I'd appreciate your input when you have the chance. Thanks! XL XR2 (talk) 01:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)