User talk:Skittleys/Archive Oct-Dec 08
 | This page 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. |
|
|||
Copyedit request
Would you be willing to copyedit Albert Speer which is currently at FAC?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Randall Flagg is currently up at FAC and I was told I should ask someone who has not worked on the article to help copyedit the article. I found you on peer review for literature, and I was wondering if you could help me clean up the article to make it FA quality. Thanks.--CyberGhostface (talk) 14:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Peer review
Hi there! :) I was wondering, if it wasn't too much trouble, if you could take a quick look at the S Club article and join in with its current peer review. Thanks very much. »—Mikay—talk—contribs→ 17:50, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Feedback: Lyon Hockey Club
Hi: I found your detailms via the Peer Review/Volunteers page and I was hoping you'd take a look at the page I have constructed for the Lyon Hockey Club and give me any feedback you think would help improve the page. Anything you could offer in the way of direction would be great. Thanks and best wishes Kisdm001 (talk) 16:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I found you name on the volunteer list for peer reviewing. Since the above article allready has double FA-status, i think it may be good enought to give it that status on the "mother of all wiki's", too. In it's present form it's a translation of the dutch article, with extra attention put in by User:Thaibeaver and a few others. I intend to rewrite some parts of the article based on the german version, since de:User:UW asked and got a lot of good comments. Would you be so kind as to a) review the article in question and b) weed out any lingistic wrinkles you may find? I would be much obliged.
Tjuus, Kleuske (talk) 19:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 42 | 8 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 43 | 10 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 44 | 17 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:49, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
|
Hey, Skittleys/Archive Oct-Dec 08. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!-- §hep • ¡Talk to me! 02:02, 6 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
"Modern day rock and indie" peer review
Hi, i read on the volunteer list that you are interested in peer reviewing the above genre of articles. I have recently significantly edited White Lies (band), and would be extremely thankful if you could lend your good mind to its review. The article recently passed a GA review, which i think makes it the youngest band ever to reach good article (They've been around for less than 2 years). I would like to continue this trend. Thank you for any help you could give me. --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 20:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Pathology conversion to WPMED taskforce
Hi Skittley,
You may be aware that moves are afoot to subsume the pathology project under WPMED as a taskforce. Please see the message at the discussion page, and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Task forces#Conversion of medicine-related projects. I support the idea, and as yet I'm the only participant who's voiced any opinion. Would you please add yours?
Cheers, Mattopaedia (talk) 01:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Requesting Peer Review of Homosexual transsexual
There is an article cleanup tag on this page and I want to know if the quality of the article is such that it can be removed. This is a controversial article. There is currently a POV dispute. I am not looking for anything related to that dispute. Simply is the article good enough to not have a cleanup tag at the top. I am seeking at least two reviews before doing anything.
This exact term has been used in various psychological theories that deal with transsexuality. The latest one is quite contfoversial. I don't desire to drag you into the controversy. I simply want to know if the article is good enough to not have a cleanup tag at the top. Does the article effectively communicate the issues? And an overall impression of the article it self.--Hfarmer (talk) 06:35, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
| WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
| This page 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. |