User talk:Yllosubmarine/Archive 4

WikiProject Films December 2007 Newsletter

The December 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Peer review at LGBT

Saw Emily Dickinson at Peer Review. Wonder if you'd consider posting a peer review at LGBT since it's one of the projects her article is under. There are some good editors there who might be able to help. Or, if you'd rather, I can put it up there. Food for thought. --Moni3 (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, heres's the page Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Peer review/Emily Dickinson. I'm going to add a note on the active talk page, too, to get some folks interested. I can take a look at it as well, but I have no idea what I might be able to add...--Moni3 (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Note of thanks in anticipation

I saw that you have Virginia Woolf on your to-do list. I had no idea it was in such bad shape! Ah! Good luck on that! I will offer whatever assistance I can as you delve into that. Qp10qp and I are working on Mary Shelley this year and Simmaren and I will finish up Jane Austen. Hopefully before the year is out, three more important literary biographies will be knocked out, eh? (By the way, I advise you to find some helpers for Woolf - embrace the wiki!) Awadewit | talk 20:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Anon edits on The Reader re Borowski

I warned them about 3RR and told them you were right and they were wrong. If they take it out again I'll block them (and, heads up, the next revert would be your third, though I won't hold that against you). Daniel Case (talk) 21:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Unicorns, Mermaids and Flaming Joels

I'm still debating what to do as my next project. I think I need to do a non-animal this time. Have you seen this? User:Casliber/Flaming Joel-wiki I think I want to go earn a Flaming Joel... --JayHenry (talk) 07:49, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XX - January 2008

The January 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 14:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Your user page

You should request speedy deletion per criterion U1 (user request), save the source of the current page and then recreate it after deletion. That way the old edits will only be visible to administrators.

Let me know when you've done this, and placed the {{db-u1}} tag on the page. I'll come over and do the dirty deed (another admin might be confused as to why you'd be recreating the page). Daniel Case (talk) 20:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll do one better - I went ahead and restored the top edit from before the deletion tag, as this seems to have been your intent. —Random832 20:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this! Daniel Case (talk) 21:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, guys! :) "This house is clean." María (habla conmigo) 21:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

If you have a moment...

Ruhrfisch and I have been working on a fun little article which we have recently put up for peer review: Joseph Priestley House. (After I finished the monumental Joseph Priestley, I thought "why not do his house?") Anyway, I was wondering (if you have time) would you consider reviewing it? It is not nearly as exciting as Emily, I'm afraid, but I would be very grateful... :) Awadewit | talk 09:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

GA Review of Armstrong Sperry

No problem. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 17:59, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

You deserve this

		The Special Barnstar
		For excellent and diligent research in preparing Emily Dickinson for FAC. --ROGER DAVIES talk 02:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Kudos! – Scartol • Tok 03:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Peer reviews and other sundries

I noticed that Roger Davies gave you quite the laundry list over at PR. You seemed a little overwhelmed. I wouldn't worry - he's a very helpful editor and genuinely interested in improving articles. As you know from certain FACs (both mine and yours), it is better to get all of those pesky problems out of the way early on. Besides, think how much your writing is going to improve with people like Roger AND Scartol checking over the article? :) Emily would be pleased. Awadewit | talk 18:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but the residual negative aspect is that one or more of the above-listed will be monitoring your talk page and making unsolicited comments about all sorts of things. Creepy! =) Actually I just popped in to blush and say "aw shucks". – Scartol • Tok 03:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

*checks for wiretaps*... María (habla conmigo) 13:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The name ish Bond, Jamesh Bond. Licenshed to kill and shell shecond-car motor vehiclesh. :)

Nice work so far by the way. I'll strike and comment later, if you don't mind! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Of course not! I'm working on more fixes in another tab, in fact. María (habla conmigo) 14:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Bond (just after losing $10 million to Le Chiffre) to Barman: "Vodka martini"

Barman: "Shaken or stirred?"

Bond: "Do I look like I give a damn?"

--ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Ave, Maria. I've replied here :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Giovanni Villani

Hi Yllosubmarine, I have addressed your concerns in the article for Villani regarding a legacy section (well, a beginning of one in any case); see the FAC discussion page.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 02:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Reagan TFA

Hi Yllosubmarine. I would like to contact you personally regarding placing Ronald Reagan on the main page. As I've clarified on the TFA requests page, I had absolutely no say in the nomination of Nancy Reagan for the main page; Raul chose it randomly and I was only notified because it said so on my watchlist. Therefore, I do not feel that my personal TFA experience should have any weight in the deciding of the Ronald Reagan one. Furthermore, I have been planning this one since it became FA in August. Nancy's came right out of left field and I do not find it appropriate to screw the Ronald Reagan article - a better and more comprehensive article - because Nancy happened to have been chosen a month ago. I totally respect you, but I am asking you, out of the goodness of your heart, to please change your vote to "support". People will be more concerned with the candidates themselves during the election, not so much who the Republicans aspire to be like. If the article is featured on Reagan's birthday as the TFA, I will consider it a personal victory and know that you helped me to acheive it. Thanks. --Happyme22 (talk) 03:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Awadewit stated in the entry below the Reagan one that there are three articles this month alone from 19th century America; Nancy Reagan's was in December and by the time February 6 rolls around that will have been two months ago. I'm starting to see a double standard: three 19th century American articles can be together in a single month, but two very different articles cannot be shown two months apart? Happyme22 (talk) 03:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

{Sigh} - I am not promoting myself over other editors. I am not trying to get my work "featured" over yours, or anyone else's. I'm trying to distingusih between two very different people whose respective FA main pages will be two months apart. --Happyme22 (talk) 03:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Happyme22, whether or not you are actually trying to promote yourself is irrelevant - it looks like you are to editors on the outside of your brain. :) To avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest in this case, it is best to wait longer. For example, I have a long list of Mary Wollstonecraft articles that have never been featured on the main page, but I was reticent to nominate A Vindication of the Rights of Men for the main page in November because Mary Wollstonecraft had just appeared on the main page six months earlier. I don't want to drown readers in Mary Wollstonecraft. I love Wollstonecraft, but not everyone does. I expect years to go by before all of those articles appear on the main page. That is fine with me, though. I know they eventually will and I know that almost every time someone types mary wollstonecraft into google, the wikipedia page is at the top of the list. Check out ronald reagan - you are influencing far more people this way. Awadewit | talk 04:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Edinburgh Zoo

I've noticed after looking over several other GA nominees that my GA standards don't seem to be as high as most people who are involved with that project. I think that GA reviewer is not the wiki-job for me. Regarding the Edinburgh Zoo nomination, I've failed the article, and I'll adjust the template on the talk page, referring to your excellent comments there. Joyous! | Talk 15:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Lisa Gerrard page.

Thanks Maria for your help :) Hopefully I can get everything done right without confusion.

Glitter1959 (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Glitter1959

I acutally saw her live in Paris last year. Ohhh man, her voice gave me chills, lol.

Anyways, someone keeps on deleting the references I put on the page.

Glitter1959 (talk) 00:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Glitter1959

I'm having a little trouble with putting the references on the page. Grrrrr. I'm not good at this sort of thing.

Glitter1959 (talk) 05:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Glitter1959

PR Emily Dickinson

When the PR is ready to be archived, just add {{Wikipedia:Peer review/Emily Dickinson/archive1}} to the top of Wikipedia:Peer review/January 2008. Then pick up at step 3. What I have done is half of step 1, nothing more. The reason is that there is a limited volume of transcluded material that can appear on any page, and the PR page was full. But new visitors will still see the link and the message that the PR is ongoing. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, Maria, I am currently working on part II on paper. I'll post it tomorrow probably. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 16:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The extra punctuation wasn't entirely superfluous. Unfortunately, MOS requires hard spaces – i.e. " " – between all instances of "p." and page number, and "pp." and page range, and I did that one as a style guide for you! Sorry for not explaining in advance, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 14:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

No problems :) MoS isn't toooo bad - there are only two or three major stumbling blocks, all (unbelievably) to do with spaces, hyphens, and dashes - though I hate it when a world expert on dashes (boggle) turns up at FAC!? By the way, I'm ever so grateful for you correcting the blasphemy. I'd gotten into the habit of navigating there using Emily Dickenson, which is a helpful redirect and I hadn't noticed the error of my ways. I think we can get this to FAC within two or three weeks. How do you feel about me co-nominating with you and helping steer it through. Awadewit reckons I appear serenely calm and positively respectful though this doesn't always reflect my inner thoughts. What I'm working on by the way is some broad stroke structural stuff. It'll need a copy-edit afterwards, but I can do that, if you like. I've ordered the Gardens book: it'll be here tomorrow. It's got useful stuff about ED and LBGT, and casts light on some of the illnesses.--ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Kewl! Best then, I think, if I do comment at the PR that the work is continuing on the ED talk page. Which is where I'll post some of my structural comments shortly. The library sounds very useful. Thanks! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 16:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

PS: loved the comment about folding the laundry :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk

A peer review request

Maria, I wonder if you'd care to do a peer review for the article on Balzac's novel Le Père Goriot? I'd be much obliged. Thanks in advance! – Scartol • Tok 16:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

19th-century novels task force

Hi, Yllosubmarine/Archive 4. I'm starting up a 19th-century novels task force for WP:NOVELS. This would cover the works of many well-known authors, including Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, Mark Twain, Victor Hugo and Leo Tolstoy. If you think you'd be interested in supporting or participating in the task force, please let me know. Cheers. – Liveste [talk • contrib] 10:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Slipknot (band)

I think that this should be closed, how would I go about requesting it's closier? Rezter ^TALK 14:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Germany Invitation

Hello, Yllosubmarine! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be. Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany | finger on pulse Wikipedia:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board | finger on pulse

--Zeitgespenst (talk) 15:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Today's Featured Article

I moved AKA up to Jan. 29th instead of Feb. 14th, because that's the day of the sorority's incorporation, as seen here. Thanks. miranda 05:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Ralph Bakshi FAC

I created the image. There are no copyright problems with it. There is, in fact, enough of a difference between the image it is based on so that it would NOT violate anyone's copyright. The image as is, I own 100%, and have released it into the public domain. I deleted the sentence that you believe is not NPOV. The article is very high quality as it is, and the issues Indopug has referred to have been cleaned up. There is no reason for anyone not to support this FAC. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 19:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC))

Hardly helpless!

By the way, please feel free to drop me a note if you want any help with Emily Dickinson. I know that these articles can seem overwhelming. I myself feel overwhelmed with Jane Austen at the moment. :) I mean, to infobox or not to infobox? Awadewit | talk 19:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hard spaces

You may be interested in the following discussion. I'm delighted by Sandy's initiative! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 12:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Novels Collaboration of the Month

You supported Rabbit, Run, which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

	<font=3> Thanks for your support, peer review, and comments - Joseph Priestley House made featured article today! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words just now. Your peer review comments were very helpful, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Today's featured article

I noticed that Knut (polar bear) is going to be on the main page! Congratulations! I'll try to watch it for a few hours that day, while I'm trying to cut down my 80-page chapter into a 20-page article! Awadewit | talk 16:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• I just can't revert as fast as the bot! Awadewit | talk 17:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, congratulations on having the article appear on the main page! :) Hope you've been doing well! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

• Congratulations - you made it! Awadewit | talk 00:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• By the way, check out Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 7, 2008. My fun is just beginning! (Odd that this article was chosen before A Vindication of the Rights of Woman - the ways of wikipedia are mysterious.) Awadewit | talk 05:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films January 2008 Newsletter

The January 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have any suggestions for improvement or desire other topics to be covered, please leave a message on the talk page of one of the editors.Thank you. Nehrams2020 (talk) 02:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Knut

Although a little late, I'd like to congradulate you on getting Knut featured. Great work! Cheers, Basketballone10 00:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Knut's day to shine!! Isn't it exciting? Just wait until all the American kids sit down for computer lab tomorrow morning. Oh boy! --JayHenry (talk) 07:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

*cries* María (habla conmigo) 13:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

JFYI

*wääh* ;-) --Ü 08:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

That's next on my list, trust me! :) María (habla conmigo) 13:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Travails

		The Purple Barnstar
		In recognition of the travails you enduring and steadfastly overcame during the Knut FAC and during the little bear's appearance on Wikipedia's Front Page on February 4, 2008. --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Heavens! The punning possibilities had never even crossed my mind :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you spam

		My RfA
		Thank you very much, Maria, for your support in my RfA which I really appreciate. It closed at 83/0/0. I was surprised by the unanimity and will do my best to live up to the new role. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC) The patio at the Partal Palace in the Alhambra, Andalucia.

Thanks! Glad you like it. Now, some good news for you. I've spent a fair amount of time slaving over Emily. I'll finish it tomorrow and email what I've done to you for comment. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 18:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

PS: I'm so pleased you didn't end up in a sanatorium yesterday.

Tamara Jenkins

On 10 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tamara Jenkins, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXI - February 2008

The February 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --12:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Ben Daniels: GA review

Hi, thanks for taking the time to review "Ben Daniels". I've made many of the changes that you suggested, and added some comments on the article's talk page. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 04:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

FA Opposition

Could i convince you to put your opposition on hold while i correct the problems that you mentioned. id like to ask till next sunday if at all possible. thank you Rankun (talk) 16:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Knut

Eeek, sorry about that, I think I mis-remembered how little I did with regard to Knut, I just corrected that. But the point I was making was that all articles that can be made Featured, except those that are X-rated, should be allowed on the Main Page. One of the users was arguing that video games lack notability and significance in the grand scheme of things, and I mentioned Knut, since a cute polar bear is not world historic, but it is encyclopedic, comprehensive, and should be in the encyclopedia. And if Knut gets to go on the main page, there is no reason video games shouldn't get the same treatment. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Stephen Crane

		The Biography Barnstar
		To María — In recognition of your excellent and tireless efforts in improving the biography of Stephen Crane. Haberstr gets one too! —Yamara ✉ 04:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Nice work!

Keep up the great work on these articles about writers! We definitely need better coverage of people like Dickinson and Crane. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 03:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Verna Fields

Thank you very much for your careful review of this article for GA status; your suggestions are quite helpful. I should be able to complete the revisions you suggested before the deadline. There is one issue that I wanted to discuss with you. The issue is raised by your suggestion to delete the names of directors for one of the films listed in the article. My policy has been to name the director explicitly for each film, despite the fact that this listing may lead to awkward prose. Film editing is a collaboration between the director and the editor, and the director is generally considered accountable for a film's editing. I thus feel that it is essential to give the director's name for each of the films discussed in an article about a film editor, just as one would list all of the co-authors on an essay or paper. I particularly want this article to model this approach. If its candidacy is successful, I believe that this article will be the first GA about a film editor. Easchiff 13:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Easchiff, I'm glad my comments and suggestions were helpful and I'm pleased to see how the article is slowly but surely shaping up -- please take your time! I'm not going to fail the article if it takes more time than the usual week, so don't worry. Just let me know if you need more time so I know that you are still working. You make a very good case for the inclusion of the director(s), and I can definitely see the collaboration between editor and director as an important and notable bond, so feel free to discard that comment. I am, however, concerned with the writing becoming clunky and bogged down with too much info. People tend to describe films in list formatting, which is not only difficult to read but a sight for sore eyes: "He worked on the film Whatever (1998, directed by so-and-so) and then the film Yadda Yadda (2000, directed by so-and-so)". I have higher standards than most, so I can be quite picky about monotonous phrasing. I trust that you can find a way around this issue with a little tweaking here and there. See if you can work the directors into the prose itself instead of consistently using parenthetical asides. "The director, so-and-so, said of Fields...", "Fields worked closely with so-and-so, the director, to ensure..." etc. That way you have variation, which makes for far more intriguing writing.

By the way, I wasn't aware that this would be the first GA about a film editor; very interesting and good on you. It's great to see lesser known fields being given such attention here on Wikipedia. The fact that this is article in particular is about a woman in a man's field is certainly not lost on me either. :) María (habla conmigo) 13:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I think I've pretty much completed the revisions you'd suggested in your GA review; thanks again. Let me know if you've got any further suggestions or concerns- Easchiff 12:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your second GA review; I've worked on these suggestions also. I'm reminded of Eliot's dedication of "The Waste Land" to Pound: il miglior fabbro. I see that I've gotten rusty on punctuation of quotations; thanks for your patient editing there. Best wishes, and congratulations also for the acceptance of the lovely article on Emily Dickinson for featured status. Easchiff 19:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on the FA!

		The Literary Barnstar
		For your beautifully-written and carefully-researched contributions to Emily Dickinson - now millions will know that "there is no frigate like a book / to take us lands away". Thank you for making information on this wonderful poet so much more accessible to the world! Awadewit | talk 02:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, kudos and huzzah! – Scartol • Tok 02:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Aww, thanks, guys. :) *blush* María (habla conmigo) 03:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Well done! It is a rare pleasure to review an article that doesn't still need extensive copyediting at FAC. Thank you for writing her, and thank you for writing her well. Maralia (talk) 04:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of High Culture
		For your long and determined efforts to create a high-quality truly encyclopedic article for Emily Dickinson --ROGER DAVIES talk 11:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi María, I only just noticed that Emily Dickinson had become a Featured Article — congratulations! You all did a wonderful job there; I reviewed it and found it well-nigh perfect. I didn't vote at FAC right away because I thought I should wait for the "Major Revision in Progress" tag to come down, but it seems that I was too dilatory in that. ;) I'm sure, though, that I'll have more opportunities to review wonderful articles from you. :) Willow (talk) 09:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

PS. Oh, the one thing that leapt out at me was the phrase, "prominent but not opulent". I love it, but I was worried that "opulent" might be rather, you know, fine and some readers might not get it? But neither I nor my thesaurus could think of a substitute wording that expressed the same idea. Willow (talk) 09:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

• Hola María Bonita, I am so glad you rescued, fixed and improved Emily's article so much, so well done. I am pretty sure you read the Spanish version which was a feature article like a year ago. Now both of them are equally good and well presented. Especially you cleaned up all that trash, rumors, speculations, sick stuff etc. Emily deserved it! She was a great poet and a special kind of woman, almost forgotten. Your dedication and good work are highly recognized and appreciated. People give you a lot of different kind of presents...yo te regalo una canción, for the whole of you to enjoy...Para ti María Bonita

--Cefaro (talk) 04:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Belated congratulations from me as well. Gosh, I'm slacking off! I haven't done any good work all month. What's your next project? I'm thinking of making a pass at F. Scott Fitzgerald or maybe even Hemingway later this year... think you'd be interested? I would need professional help :0 but their trashed articles are driving me nuts! --JayHenry (talk) 18:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... I am interested in alcoholics. Maybe I need more professional help than I thought :0 But don't you see? I'm Jay Henry and I need these articles to be good! Also, I really want to win a Flaming Joel-wiki and Papa Hemingway is on the list. --JayHenry (talk) 23:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Arthur Rimbaud

I've started mapping this out. I'm working on finding a really good lit crit source for themes and styles. Don't worry about French. There's masses of good scholarship in English. Do you have access to Jstor, by the way? I'll email you tomorrow, if that's okay, with suggested sources and stuff. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 05:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Yes, he will be great fun! As for the other matter, don't worry about it. It'll probably never happen. And, even if it does, so what? You've acted in good faith. Oh, and if you think that editor was rude, you should see some of the stuff I've had my user page replaced with :) Actually, on second thoughts, you probably shouldn't :)))) In summary, don't worry! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 05:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

KNUT

hello maria, my name is mike, i am a native of detroit but have been raised in berlin. i grew up here in this town and have lived here in berlin for over 30 years. now, my question to you is, why did you delete my link to the Knut page? was it the wording? calling it a petition??? considering the fact that the rbb link is listed as an external link, i believe that my contibution should be allowed. if you would kindly follow my link and actually read the page, you will see that it calls to attention the controversy that has been going on over this little fella. there are many activities currently going on in the berlier zoo, where animals simply disappear or are transferred out to other zoos in reckless disregard to their well-being. though this is a worry of the website, it is not the reason for starting the so called "petition". for the first time in decades, berlin and the berliners have an animal that not only brings awareness to the environmental issues the world is facing, but also an animal that has won his way into the hearts of millions. berliners need knut. if you know the history of the zoo and it´s meaning to the berliners, there are many animals such as johnny the chimpanzee, or knautschke the hippo... all individual characters that were vital to the spirit and morale of the city. the "knut forever in berlin" also explains that importance on the website. the intention is not to add to a controversy, but to help end it... and to keep the polar bear in berlin, where he belongs... with his audience, his surroundings and the other things and people he has grown accustomed to and fond of. he is a modern symbol, not only as a "berliner bear" but for us berliners a symbol of our hometown and an individual we have all warmed and opened our hearts to. so please, take the time and have a look at the site. you will see that it is of relevance, and that the link belongs with the list of external links. if you have any questions or anything else in need of clarification, please get back to me. i will then post the link on sunday if there are no further objections from you. thanks for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackspyder1967 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

well, unfortunately i feel that your opinion is biased as far as my link is concerned, and i am happy to say wwj radio in detroit is bringing a report on this "improper or vague" contribution of spam and is airing it. cbs will more than likely pick it up as well. this in my view and the view of other unbiased wikipedians in germany (where the link has been posted by another member) see this link as a relevant piece that adds to the overall topic. links in russian, italian and spanish are following as international knut supporters see the relevance of the link and the story behind it. thank you for your time, especially in pointing out to us in an elitist manner what is relevant and what is not. we berliners will remember this and be eternally greatful to you. as will knut, i am sure.

i think there has been a slight misinterpretation, the radio report is about the knut website and the discussion on the zoos plans to give/sell knut to another zoo. my saying that there is a feature on wwj doesnt have anything to do with you or others referring to it as spam. it is solely about the website and is by no means to be seen as a threat to you or others who do not wish to show the whole story. i have not, nor will i ever resort to threats as a means to achieve my goals. threatening people is not what i, the website or its supporters is about. through the website we wish to call knuts situation and the discussion around him to a worldwide attention, and among other things bring to a public awareness that he can not silently disappear as many animals have in the zoo, that he is denied toys and affection which in turn lead to the bear feeling isolated and display behavioral patterns similar to those of neglected human children. i am sure that had you taken the time to have a look at it, as i had asked you you would have seen this. nonetheless, thank you so much for your time.

Misha Defonseca

Hallo Yellow submarine - thank you for cleaning up the article. I think, one should signal two very important details (as I did it in former Versions): the doubts of Broder concerning the biography of Defonseca published in the Spiegel 1996 - and the differences between the english and french version of the books (see the blog of Jane Daniel). Finishing - there is actually a discussion to merge this biographical article with the article concerning the book (Misha: A Mémoire of the Holocaust Years (you can found the discusssion on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Misha_Defonseca)! ciao and good luck for your successfull nightstudies !Christophe.Neff (talk) 17:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February 2008 Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Invite

Century Tower

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Florida, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of University of Florida. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

Jccort (talk) 04:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Misha

Hallo Maria, a little bit to tired to answer you (or on the Misha talkpage) in detail. The english version is actually okay, - in France and in Belgium there is actually a certain tendancy to bash the parents of Mrs. Defonseca. The main accusation against the father of Mrs. Defonseca is that he cracked under torture (perhaphs to avoid torture for his 4 year old daugther) - and becomeing so a traitor ! Christophe Neff (talk) 22:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

and here the site of the belgium newspaper (translation of the article headlines = the dark side of the history father of Misha) http://www.lesoir.be/channels/cinema/evenement-robert-de-wael-raye-2008-03-02-581412.shtml - and this information has been used uncritically for the french wikipedia article ; Christophe Neff (talk) 22:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Toni Morrison and WP:LIT

Thanks for the note, Maria. I've been hoping to get some clarification about the relation of authors to the WP:Lit project. Still, it doesn't make sense to me that authors are not covered by both projects. Are you aware of any reasons why? Also, Morrison's article now has nothing to connect it to any art projects -- even the bio project doesn't list it under the writers group. Shouldn't something be added to create a clearer link to the Literature pages on Wikipedia? Thanks, Aristophanes68 (talk) 19:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction about the Portal Tag -- our project page must have the wrong instructions. Is there a certain place on the Talk Page for the tag? Aristophanes68 (talk) 20:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind -- I found the Wiki guide for Portals that says to place them in the "See Also" section of the main page. Thanks. Aristophanes68 (talk) 21:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou

		The Reviewers Award
		I Woody, do hereby give Yllosubmarine this reviewers award for all the hard work and excellent reviews you give at the FAC process. They are much appreciated. Thankyou. Woody (talk) 11:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello and Knut

De nada. Cuando vi el artículo decidí instantaneamente que iba a traducirlo. Es un gran artículo y es genial que sea de un tema "diferente" y nuevo: felicidades. Además estoy pensando en presentarlo a candidato a artículo destacado cuando termine el "Wikiconcurso 16". Saludos. BL2593 (talk) 15:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC) (Te escribo en español para no realizar ninguna falta de ortografía ;-).)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXII - March 2008

The March 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --18:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Rutland Barrington and George Grossmith

Thanks for your very thorough comments on Barrington. I will begin to address them tomorrow (Sunday). Would you kindly also look at our similar article on George Grossmith? He and Barrington starred together in the Savoy operas, as did Jessie Bond (but her article was only nominated this week). Now that you have read Barrington, you are certainly the GA reviewier with the most background to review Grossmith. No problem, of course, if you're busy with other stuff, and I look forward to addressing your comments on Barrington asap. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I went through your Barrington comments and made the changes, also leaving replies to particular comments on the talk page. Your comments were extremely helpful and have led to many improvements in the article. Let me know if it needs further changes. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help, Maria. I addressed the last few items. I look forward to your comments on George Grossmith, whenever you can get to him. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Emily Dickinson quotes

Sorry about that; I remember thinking they would be better at Wikiquote, but that thought was lost somewhere while I was helping the user. Thanks for keeping me in line, though! Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 16:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Review

I'm always so flattered when I turn the sign on and the requests come flooding in. Sure, I'll have a look at the thing. Could you remind me when it's in a ready state? – Scartol • Tok 15:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It's up to you if you want to wait. I'd rather do my review before it's considered, but I know how long the GAN wait usually is. Your call. I'll start on it later today, hopefully. – Scartol • Tok 15:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay; I'm taking my first look at it now. As so often happens, my first comment is aesthetic: How would you feel about moving the image at the bottom up, so it doesn't interfere with the reference notes? I'll make the change and you can decide if it's an okay adjustment or not.. – Scartol • Tok 17:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Grossmith; Jessie Bond

Thanks again for a very helpful review. I went through all the Grossmith comments and made changes in the article. I disagreed with you on one point. Take a look and see if you still disagree. To somewhat even out the male/female balance of GA-class articles on Gilbert and Sullivan role creators, I nominated Jessie Bond for GA class a week or two ago. Can you put her on your 'To do' list? She was arguably the most famous female Savoyard (although two other women probably come in a close second and third). -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

That'll be great. No hurry - you've been super speedy on the first two. Maybe after you read Jessie Bond, I'll convince you to join WP:G&S!  :) LOL. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Bob

I figured that I'd try to return the favor a little, but I've actually got to earn a living now, so no more for today, probably! It looks like you have Bob under very good control, and it seems well referenced. Illustrations: No other pictures of Bob available? What about people who were important in his lifo or work? A picture of the group hiking? A meeting where Bob is yelling at politicians?  :) Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

How about a map of the park named for him, or some kind of image from news sources that wrote about him around the time of his death? Or just a free image related to the issues that he advocated from one of the environmental articles? Just brainstorming. I hope you get permission from the authors. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:09, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Election

The bot is running at the moment - should arrive with you later today. Name starts with "Y" you understand. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 13:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - 1st Coordinators Election

An election has been proposed and has been set up for this project. Description of the roles etc., can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators. If you wish to stand, enter your candidacy before the end of March and ask your questions of anyone already standing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators/May 2008. Voting will start on the 1st April and close at the end of April. The intention is for the appointments to last from May - November 2008. For other details check out the pages or ask. KevinalewisBot (talk) 14:24, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Earth Abides

Thank you for spending time on the article. I can see I have my work cut out for me, but I am already learning a lot. Jacqke (talk) 18:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Bob Marshall's Burial Location in Salem Fields Cemetery

Hello Maria. I noticed that you modified my edit to Bob Marshall's burial information in Salem Fields Cemetery. For your information, I went directly to Salem Fields last December to visit his grave. The cemetery personnel have strict rules and regulations regarding visitors. They want to know who you are and why you are visiting in the cemetery. If you're not related to the deceased, they make you feel like you're trespassing. I was going to photograph Marshall's grave and post the image on his Wikipidia article, but photography is not allowed in the cemetery. The office door to the cemetery is locked, and they come outside to a waiting area to give you directions to the grave site from a big map on a wall. I was taking a leisurely stroll through the cemetery, and they informed me that they don't want people walking aimlessly through the grounds. Never in my life have I been treated with such contempt by cemetery personnel. Salem Fields Cemetery is located in a relatively bad neighborhood in Brooklyn, and it's my guess that they've had trouble with visitors in the past.

I have been a member of the Wilderness Society for more than thirty five years, and I know a lot about Bob Marshall. I have Glover's biography, and I have the 1940 issue of Living Wilderness that commemorates his death. Several years ago, I sent e-mail to James Glover at Southern Illinois University.

I am going to make another edit to the burial information for Bob Marshall. It is an eerie coincidence that Bob Marshall and his sister Putey both died at age 38. One of Marshall's brothers reached a ninetieth birthday.

When I visited your user page, I saw the painting of "The Lady Clare." This is an amazing coincidence. John William Waterhouse is one of my favorite artists. I purchased a print of "Hylas and the Nymphs" and hung it on my wall for a long time.

Anthony22 (talk) 23:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 09:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

George Grossmith, Jr.

A 4th article, eh? Well, would you take a very quick look at George's son, George Grossmith, Jr. and tell me whether you think it is close to GA? If not, I don't have the time now to do significant new work on it, but if you think it only needs polishing up a little, I'll nominate it. Here's a sad story: I joined Wikipedia to work on the G&S-related articles (only about 300 of them within our project WP:G&S), and I wrote lots of bios as well as writing/collaborating on articles about Gilbert's plays (there are 70 of them), Sullivan's operas (there are 23 of them), and other Sullivan works (there are a few dozen that deserve articles). Soon, I dipped my toe into WP:MUSICALS, and then someone pointed out to me that there were very few articles on Edwardian musical comedies -- that is, musicals produced from 1890 to World War I, and I began writing them: I wrote a couple of hundred of them, including bios of composers, authors and actors (this is where George, Jr. and his ilk come in) as well as British and American shows of the period. Then I realized that there were virtually no articles related to musical burlesques, written from the 1860s through the 1880s. That was another lot of articles. At the same time, I got more heavily involved with WP:MUSICALS and worked on dozens (hundreds?) of articles related to musical theatre. I also realized that the articles on London theatres were woefully stubby, and another editor and I beefed up lots of them.... Well, here we are, and I'm a sad Wikipedia addict. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

LOL! Good for the Polar Bear. Thanks for taking a look at GG, Jr. What you said about references concerns me the most, because I think that there just aren't any substantial references about him that are not already included in the article, although it is possible that I can add more inline references from the general sources that are already listed at the bottom. I'll see. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Danger! (tom.mevlie)

I probably should've cited various acronyms at him, to be sure, but I dunno; I let him know I knew what he did and I let other people know I knew. If he keeps up being a cock, I'll report him to some admin and let them handle him. And if that doesn't work, well, I'll just have to FINISH HIM! Howa0082 (talk) 01:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Coordinator elections

Are you planning on running? Because I think the question was directed to the incumbent, not to you. But if you do want to run, then the election could probably use it, four posts and three candidates.WilliamMThompson (talk) 12:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry then, I got confused because your signature says maria, my mistake, I apologise.WilliamMThompson (talk) 00:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you accusing me of something? Because I don't take offence to that, unless of course you can back it up with evidence, then I will be more than happy to talk to you about what ever it is that you are accusing me of doing. But what irritates me is subtlety, why do you want me to go when I have done nothing?WilliamMThompson (talk) 02:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

for this. Much appreciated. Cowardly Lion (talk) 16:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Just getting sillier

Agreed! based on editing since unblocking etc. - Removed. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Uthanc

The Watcher in the Water article has recently been improving and is still building however User:Uthanc keeps moving the book illustration picture to the adaptations section. He has repeatedly moved the picture even though the style of writing says that a book illutration image is supposed to go in the top or at least near the top. I have talked to him but he ignores me, I was wondering if you could tell him to stop shifting the image and naming it falsely because the image is an illustration from a book not a screenshot of the film. LOTRrules (talk) 17:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

latest Lovely Bones revert

I actually wound up restoring that bit about how the novel ends (or at least a shorter version from my original plot summary), and keeping what that anon editor had deleted ... even if they didn't use an edit summary, I decided not to revert it last night because that whole "symbols" section, which I wrote in an earlier, looser time, is really sort of OR (It would be so nice to see if there's any good academic criticism-type stuff that could be sourced to!) Daniel Case (talk) 16:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

The Watcher in the Water

Hello there, what do you think of the article of the now? We have added in more reliable sources and fixed most of the mistakes I think. LOTRrules (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Apex Hides the Hurt‎

Okay, I've done my best to address these issues or comment on them where appropriate. I hope you will now consider re-reviewing it for GA status. Cheers, and thanks for the helpful review. :) Qst (talk) 17:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I, the Supreme

Hi Maria, something funny happened, I had started to review this article this morning but I forgot to add the template.. The last edits I made to the article were part of the review. Anyway since I started my read-truh this morning I made a number of anotations (in notepad) that might be helpfull to you if you want them. Just let me know, Cheers Acer (talk) 14:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

That works too, Thanks :D Acer (talk) 15:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

GA status for GBS

Maria, Thank you for responding so promptly to my request. Some of the faults you've found can be easily corrected; those, I will correct at once. Others will need more explanation and, perhaps, your help, if you consent to give it. Where should I post my questions to you: here, in your discussion space, or on the George Bernard Shaw discussion page?

I understand its basic editing tools well enough to use them, but am ignorant of Wiki's ways and policies. If I go athwart those I'm sure someone will correct me: I think of it as imprecationary learning. (That's how I know what NPOV means!) Wugo (talk) 00:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

María—By all means copy-edit, if you can spare the time! Even if you expurgate the blarney-flavored phrases I will not gnash my teeth. (My heart may break quietly, or I may shed a silent tear, but the world will never know.)

Scholarly sources may be more easily supplied than you expect, since I have read and may even own them. I want to retain the online references for the convenience of readers and simply tack on the coordinates for paper sources as a placative for scholars. Would that be satisfactory? Recently I have been installing electronic versions of Shaw's works in Wikisource and, where US copyright still holds, in Wikilivres (Canada). I'll soon start using those in the GBS article. I did, already, for Black Girl, because my hand was forced by another contributor.

The References are mainly mine, but the Bibliography was supplied recently by Ceoil. Many items in the biblio are mysteries to me. Wugo (talk) 02:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

"—if you find a goldmine at your local library•••" Not very likely! But I have learned to dig for gold at Alibris.com, a used book conglomerate that boasts an inventory of 60 million volumes. I'm buying Shaw books as swiftly as my budget will allow, faster than my weary eyes can read them. Today his Sixteen Self Sketches came; I hope to squeeze a lot of juice from it. Wugo (talk) 04:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I see you've noticed Bill McGonigles contribution concerning Shaw's eugenic thinking. This is his second effort. I deleted the first because I could not verify any of his references, not even that they exist, excepting On the Rocks. I own "Rocks" and am familiar with its contents; nothing in the preface or the play justifies Bill's conclusions.

I think Bill is eager for a battle, but his timing's hardly opportune. Does Wiki provide a remedy for this kind of contretemps? Wugo (talk) 04:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Shaw did have thoughts about eugenics, as he did on almost every subject. I'll give some thought to adding a comment to that effect somewhere in the GBS article. Is there an urgent need for it? Bill's reference, quoting a passage from On the Rocks, is accurate—See Complete Plays and Prefaces Vol. V, pp. 492-3—but it relates to governmental use of capital punishment and not at all to Shaw's version of eugenics. Wugo (talk) 17:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Very well. I'll give Bill time to respond with authentic references, then add a comment about eugenics to the GBS article. I've been concentrating on the quality of the general references; if those seem adequate, I will defer further improvements for the present.

The online works by Shaw has multiple sources and wlll have even more when the material in Wikisource and Wikilivres is added. All I want is for our readers to be able to find the individual works with ease. If that can be done, I'll happily attempt to comply with your suggestions. But, remember, I have no idea how to do it. Could you do it for me without a lot of trouble? If so, I'd learn by watching. Pliably, Wugo (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

María—Please fix the linkages for me. I like your supervision. I assure you that I've no axe to grind, no nest to feather and that my ego is unsquashable. I shall continue working with the references: Recent experience has convinced me that academic rigor makes a lot of sense! Wugo (talk) 20:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

How very kind of you María!—Your guidance made my job far easier than it would have been without you. Let's share the Barnstar even-Steven. I have big plans for improving the Biography: I'll cite his biographers, as needed, but mainly I'll work from Shaw's own writings, including his collected correspondences, of which books I have a nice assortment. Wugo (talk) 00:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Michael jackson

Hi you contributed to the last featured nomination review for michael jackson Here. Since then the article has improved. Im considering renominateing it. Would it be worth it. Realist2 (talk) 03:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

It already is a GA article ? Realist2 (talk) 17:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers i wasnt aware of the date thing, not quite sure why i did that with the colon.... I dont really hold out much hope of a michael jackson related article getting to FA ever here at wiki. 50% of the worlds population hate the guy, go figure. Realist2 (talk) 17:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I just took a look at the peer review voluntary list, none of those users would be suitable for michael jackson i think, theres only one of them that does popular music and thats only on albums and singles. Additionally 40% of the michael jackson article is about the tabloid trash not the music. I might need multiple users who specialise in each area lol. Realist2 (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Watcher in the Water again

Why can't you review it? You have done before. LOTRrules (talk) 23:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

For being funny

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		I don't often laugh aloud while reading Wikipedia, but your comment exposing the truth about literary thematic discussions at the TKAM FAC was gloriously enjoyable. – Scartol • Tok 12:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2008 Newsletter

The March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

GA procedure lapse

I do apologise. My computer crashed just after I finished posting on the talkpage, and when it came back I forgot I hadn't finished the procedure. Thanks for finishing it. Brianboulton (talk) 13:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Gene Wilder

Thanks for your feedback on this article's GA nomination. A lot of the newly added material and style was written by User:Yamanbaiia, who has done a marvelous job in her work. She had asked me to keep an eye out on the article "so the article doesn't look like it's been written by a Spanish monkey" (ha) and I will go back over it for language style issues and will leave the reference work to her since she's the one with the book. We'll get back with you as soon as possible. Thanks again. Wildhartlivie (talk) 14:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Howdy! Wildhartlivie and I think that all of your concerns have been addressed, thanks for reveiwing :) .--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 22:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

The short answer is yes and request a check user Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. I think it will lead to a wider block. I would also put it up at WP:ANI. I don't know enough of the procedues but I'll figure things out. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 19:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Watership Down

Maria, thanks for picking up the Watership Down GA nom process. I have been periodically working on the article, but its GA nom surprised me and I agree it's not quite ready for primetime. Your observations and suggestions are appreciated and worth pursuing. Coincidentally, I ended up doing the second GA review for Watcher in the Water; funny how paths cross in WP. Again, thanks, and I hope we'll have WD in shape for another shot in the next few months.

On another note, would you mind taking a quick look at A Canticle for Leibowitz and feeding back any observations? I've amassed some more Themes material -- which I'll be adding soon -- and am interested in any suggestions you have about other areas in preparation for a peer review and an FA nom. I'm especially interested in thoughts on the Plot section: I pruned it back quite a bit last year and feel it is still too long; another prespective would be welcome. Thank you.
Jim Dunning | talk 23:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up on the Bob Marshall article! I love anything Adirondacks (my ashes are going there -- I've been vacationing there since I was a lil tyke; we go every summer), so learning more about them is a welcome experience. I'll take a serious look at the article tonight. Feel free to edit ACfL (I fixed that wayward ref, so thanks). I'd been considering reformatting the refs in Harvard style and was going to ask for your thoughts, and then I saw what you did with Bob Marshall. I'll check out the article later. Thanks.
Jim Dunning | talk 00:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

PR question

Hi Maria, I will take a look at Bob Marshall (wilderness activist) in the next day or so. I think Geography is an OK place to put it for PR - you could also double list it by adding a second {{Peer review page|topic=everydaylife}} or whatever topic you want. I think most people that get lots of reviews ask lots of people. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

• Would you mind looking at the peer review for Black Moshannon State Park, especially language? User:Dincher is the main author and I have made some major contributions too. We are about ready for FAC, but have been trying to get one or two more reviews. If you can't, no problem or worries, but if you can that would be great. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your review of Private (novel series). --James26 (talk) 03:26, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I was short on time yesterday, but have commented further on the article's Talk Page. Thanks again. --James26 (talk) 11:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Your suggestions are noted, much-appreciated...and implemented! I must admit it's a better article. I'll probably leave it alone for a short period, hope it doesn't get torn apart in the meanwhile ;), then try seeking GA status again sometime soon. Thanks. --James26 (talk) 13:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Novels WikiProject Newsletter

I must admit to being bot-ignorant. I'd try John Carter (talk · contribs) first. It is a good idea. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a somewhat confusing matter. It looks like Betacommandbot sent it out to at least some people on the 7th. I'll try to hand deliver the remainder myself today. John Carter (talk) 17:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what happened on the seventh; some people got it, it looks like most didn't. And when you've automatic complete on your computer, it ain't that hard. You just start typing the title, let the machine complete it, and cut and paste the contents. I've done that sort of thing before. John Carter (talk) 17:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Novels newsletter

BetacommandBot (see my talkpage delivery) was recruited to deliver the newsletter. It seems You did not get it. I'm not sure why... I advised him to deliver it to all members (of WP:NOVELS). Should I look into this matter? Best, feydey (talk) 19:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes looks like it wasn't delivered to all... Well, we'll (2x!) get another bot then to deliver it next month (hopefully to all!). feydey (talk) 19:26, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Future Shawk

María: The section of GBS named Works was originally a directory to Shaw's work available online. It has no value as it stands, so I plan to convert it to a full-dress Bibliography, with appropriate internal linkages. The present Bibliography, contributed by Ceoil, would be renamed Suggested Reading. To me these changes and additions appear to have priority over expanding the biographical section.

I'm still unsure of Wiki policy, so I ask for and will adhere to your advice concerning external linkages. I truly think my list of Shaw's work online, with URLs, would be useful to any user with a desire to read Shaw's writing and especially to one with limited access to libraries. Would I be faulted if I were to put the online list on a separate, special page and provide an internal linkage to it in the GBS article? Wugo (talk) 22:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, Further Reading the existing Bibliography shall become. The Bibliography of Edgar Allan Poe is the fullest flowering of what I had in mind; I'd visualized something similar. albeit less ambitious. One thing I like about this approach is that I can create the bibliographic page before linking it to the GBS article, thus avoiding irritating users by displaying the endless but essential edits of a developing section. I don't care if you are not a listing expert! I value your level-headed judgment as a counterweight for my tendency to leap first and later watch disaster looming. I'll do the work, you need only use the leash according to your judgment. If things get out of hand, we can call in a listing expert, but I don't expect to need one.

Is there anything wrong with developing this project on a page not listed elsewhere? I did that in my personal space when I began working on GBS and some kindly person told me he had labeled it "no-wiki" so it wouldn't get into the mainstream. I have no idea how he did it. Wugo (talk) 02:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough! I'll do the deed at User:Wugo/GBS Biblio. No need for looking now; I've only staked the claim. Wugo (talk) 13:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIII - April 2008

The April 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Almost done now. :) John Carter (talk) 23:21, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Jean Rhys

Have I got this in the right place? hmmmmn.... Anyway, thank you for explaining about the 'reference from the future' on the page for the novelist Jean Rhys. I have started a Talk page for my username, so please stay in touch, as it is quite likely that there may be articles in which we have a common interest. I am not too good at this editing business, and some of the notation/mark-up conventions used are a bit difficult for me to grasp at present, but I am getting the feel of it slowly. I am interested in checking entries for people with whom I have had some connection (such as Jean); and also in starting entries for people who have none. One such would be Derrick Lewis Leon, who died of consumption in the 1930s and was a friend of my late father. He wrote biographies of Proust and Tolstoy, but is totally forgotten now, which I think is a pity. Your Talk page is getting a bit long, by the way! or so it says at the top of it... I do hope you will get in touch with me when you have a moment. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by G88keeper (talk • contribs) 11:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Awards sections and succession boxes

Please add to the discussion at the WP:MUSICALS talk page. Since you are a pretty experienced editor with an interest in musicals as well as other areas, I think your opinion and input would be helpful in this discussion. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hair (musical)

The refs (for the most part) are all formatted. If you get a chance to swing by the article again, it would be greatly appreciated. —  MusicMaker5376 16:18, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

The article has now been nominated for GA. I made copy edits throughout the whole article. Would you give it a once-over to make any further copy-edits that you think are needed. The section that I think needs some thought is the "Media" section. Do you think it reads OK? If not, any suggestions? All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:16, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Shaw Biblio

Hi, María—Please take a look at User:Wugo/GBS Biblio and tell me if the entries are satisfactory thus far. If there are errors, I want to know about it lest I make several hundred more. Is a table suitable for this purpose? Or is a list required? Wugo (talk) 23:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Bob Marshall

I just supported the FAC and wanted to say how much I enjoyed reading the article - one of the things I like best about Wikipedia is learning about topics and people I knew nothing about. Thanks for your helpful peer review of Black Moshannon State Park, which is also now at FAC. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

MJ

Hi the michael jackson article is on FA. Ive resolved everyones issues and things have been quiet for a while. You were involved in the last review so id appreciate it if you had a look leaving some comments. Thankyou for your time. Realist2 (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

A Canticle for Liebowitz

Maria, I am embarrassed that I forgot to thank you for your time and excellent feedback on the ACfL article for me. I'm sorry. Thank you. Now all I have to do is find the time to work on it some more. BTW, Bob Marshall is looking good. Thanks for taking the time to "add" the article to WP.
Jim Dunning | talk 15:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Happy birthday !

Feliz cumpleaños, María ! Que lo recibas bien !! (But I never pass them in only four days; I would if I could, but please accept my felicitaciones anyway :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

By the way, his placement at WP:FA is giving me a hard time; I'm thinking Culture and society? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, when I'm unsure, I just put 'em somewhere and wait to see if someone moves them :-) I can understand Explorers in geography, because they're typically associated with exploring a specific place, but I don't see that here ... which is why I thought Culture and society. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I just saw your comment at FAC too. Happy birthday!!! --JayHenry (talk) 03:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've started reading on Fitzgerald. I've decided he's a manageable topic. No Nobel Prizes. Only four complete novels. Relatively small handful of biographies. Papa will have to wait... In preparation for F. Scott, I'm about halfway finished working on Zelda Fitzgerald. Hoping to take her to FAC in the next month or so. It's not quite ready for you to review, but I will be begging shortly :) --JayHenry (talk) 02:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

GA fails

Regarding this diff, you might want to let Candyo32 (talk · contribs) know that you quick failed the articles because they were improperly nominated and probably wouldn't have passed anyway. I've already quick failed two of this user's articles; otherwise, I'd let them know myself. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 14:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Immortals

I figured out why my article is rated low. Check this link out and then reconsider the level.http://www.greygriffins.com/book4.html King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 22:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Info

Thanks for following up with my question. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 22:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)