User talk:Yllosubmarine/Archive 5

Barnstar of Murder!!

		Barnstar of Murder, Madness, and Mayhem
		On behalf of Murder, Madness, and Mayhem, this barnstar is to thank you for your hard work and patience in motivating, mentoring, and moulding the work of student editors, and helping them to achieve excellence in research and writing. For all your support, encouragement, and contributions, especially with reviewing. Thank you so much! On behalf of the entire class of UBC's SPAN312. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 01:18, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Huzzah and hooray

Mmm, FA..

Congratulations on your latest FA! Have a donut. – Scartol • Tok 02:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm gone for the day and when I check in you've earned an FA Star, a Barnstar of Murder, and a Donut. Why is it all the Wikipedians I meet end up great and famous and write better articles than me and get better food? Here you are with a donut and I've never earned so much as a bowl of cream of wheat. Next thing I know you'll be a great and famous admin too. --JayHenry (talk) 04:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

And I check in again two days later to find you've become a real estate baron as well! Good luck with the move--here's hoping it's more excitement than stress :) --JayHenry (talk) 06:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Black Mo thanks

	<font=3> Thanks for your peer review and support - Black Moshannon State Park made featured article! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

		Pennsylvania State Parks Groundhog Award, with Featured Article Star
		This award is given with respect and admiration to Maria for assistance in helping Black Moshannon State Park become a Featured Article from Ruhrfisch and Dincher (talk) 18:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. This little fellow better stay away from the lake or the creek. The medal could drown him! Dincher (talk) 20:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

An editor nominating articles for GA status, articles that I mostly improved

If you check out TenPoundHammer's talk page and mine, you will see that I've addressed that there.

Thank you for removing Greenlee Smythe and Todd Manning from being listed for GA, as I was not ready to list them yet, especially not Greenlee Smythe. I do, however, feel that Todd Manning is only a few tweaks away from GA. Anyway, thanks again. Flyer22 (talk) 05:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Two Things

Fist things first, when you added the prod, you gave no reason. Second the page cannot be delted because it's only a experiment. That is why the name is User Kingrock/Sandbox/The Immortals (Grey Griffins). So before you can even delete the article you have yo give a reason. Plus the areticle cant be up for deleted unless it's on the regular namespace not one in MY sandbox King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 20:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

FOTT

What fansite were you talking about when you left a message on the fall of the templar talk page? The only link is the official site. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 13:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Pear Review

How do you start a pear review for an article becaus thats what I want to do for Grey Griffins plus I withdranw the GA nomination. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 21:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I have added the template, followed the link, and created the PR page at Wikipedia:Peer review/Grey Griffins/archive1. I will be on the PR page in a hour thanks for the help and please leave some advice.

Thanks for your feed back on the PR King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 22:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The reason why Amazone.com is there is to show the review, unless theres another way to find that review on a reliable source. The only reason I used Amazon is because it shows the review. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 21:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I know you dont have time to help me with the article but can you PLEASE find those reviews at reliable sources? PLEASE!! I would really appreciate it. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 22:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, i have found reliable sources for the article as replaced the unreliable. I have followed every direction you gave me in the peer review and I would like you to look over it once more and then maybe give mke the last pointers. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 14:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Of digressions

Thanks for the ED message. My personal preference would be to merge them into one sub-article but I don't have time to fight this particular battle right now, I'm afraid.

Regarding AR, I still haven't had time to incorporate the AR in Abyssinia material into the article. However, he remains on my "to do" list and I hope to get round to it (probably when my lead coordinatorship ends in September) before the yellow highlighter fades from the pages.

Congratulations on your recent work with MMM and Bob Marshall. It's good to see your many talents blossoming :)

--ROGER DAVIES ^talk 12:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

PS: Good too to see you've bought a house. I do hope it's not a massive crumbling Victorian pile like mine. I've had the builders in for what seems like a decade and I'm finding it more than the human spirit can bear :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 12:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

4/28 DYK

On 28 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nancy Oliver, 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.

--Bedford 19:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Kingrock/Grey Griffins Extension based on feed back of PR

Tell me what you think about my new version of the lead for the Grey Griffins book series. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 02:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright i took your advice and I'm starting with the new Plot section, check out the page and tell me what you think of it. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 01:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films April 2008 Newsletter

The April 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) 01:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Novel quality scale

I have some ideas about developing guidelines for novel articles. Similar to what I was doing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guideline. However, I am leaving for now (be back in late-May). I'll likely speak to Wassupwestcoast at the Vancouver meet-up and bring this up. --maclean 06:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I'd just like to say thank-you very much for all your help on Operation Varsity in trying to get it to GA Status! Skinny87 (talk) 18:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Anna May Wong

Hi Maria, I've made some suggestions re the Legacy section of Anna May Wong on the talk page and wondered if they would address your concerns more fully, and if not, what else would need to be done. I'm not alone in thinking that some of the material that has been cut might need to be reinstated to promote the article from GA (hopefully) to FA, so it would be useful at this stage to know what, in your opinion, needs to be looked at for the article to achieve FA status. Many thanks --Red Sunset 19:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC) Best of luck with the move and getting settled BTW!

Thanks for the prompt response, and for the GA nom (although I only played a minor role). You're now officially on my Christmas card list! (Lol) Cheers. --Red Sunset 21:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

You deserve a chocolate chip cookie!

OK, I know it's not Christmas yet, but I just couldn't wait! --Red Sunset 22:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Now we've done it! Wong is currently appearing at a FAC near you (heaven help us all) and I thought you'd appreciate the heads up. See you there! --Red Sunset 18:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

ER

Check out my editor review, thanks! King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 03:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

A recourse on crappy GAN review

Hi, similarly like u, I was on the receiving end of a crappy GA review done recently. Don't despair, all is not lost mate! Kindly refer to this talkpage for comments & the resolution outcome. As such, promptly highlight your case to Dihydrogen Monoxide or any of the senior reviewers listed here, so that they can follow-up on your case to give u a proper GA review which u rightly deserved in the first place. Kindly forward this message to anyone u knew who had went thru' similar experience previously. Rgds. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 06:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: GA review and copy-edit?

Thanks for your comments on Rang De Basanti's talk page. As the article's main contributor, I'd be more than happy if you can provide your comments on the prose so that I can help it improve further. I wouldn't say that I'm a competent copy-editor, but atleast I'd give it a shot. Cheers! Mspraveen (talk) 16:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

		The Original Barnstar
		Just felt that you deserved this for your very helpful GA review of Reservoir Dogs, thanks a lot! The DominatorTalkEdits 22:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Flocke

On 6 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Flocke, 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) 04:05, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Zelda F.

I hate to interrupt America's newest real estate baron, as I'm sure you're busy... but I wondered if you might have a chance to pop in and help out a rather hapless hippopotaphile who's more than a little out of his element, but somehow managed to get Zelda Fitzgerald to good status. The party is at Wikipedia:Peer review/Zelda Fitzgerald/archive1, and it's more fun than unpacking boxes. --JayHenry (talk) 04:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback on My Uncle Napoleon

Thanks for your feedback on my talk page for hints on adding summaries to my edits (referring to my edits on My Uncle Napoleon). Will try my best to put edit summaries in future. Cheers. aryonoco (talk) 14:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIV - May 2008

The May 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. SteveCrossinBot (talk) 08:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

A request

I know you're very busy, but I wonder if you'd be interested in having a look at Louis Lambert (novel) and doing a peer review? I'd be ever so grateful. – Scartol • Tok 17:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words at the FAC. I figured your workload was immense, so I appreciate your support and the nice things you said. Right back at 'cha. – Scartol • Tok 17:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the reassessment of Why Didn't They Ask Evans?. I've pruned down the plot summary reducing it by almost half from my first effort (which, if I remember correctly, was my first ever attempt at a plot summary). It's still long-ish but Christie's plots were VERY convoluted and any more reduction takes it into the realms of a plot introduction! I've reinstated two elements that you deleted - the first is to change the section heading of characters to name the book (this is as stated in the wikinovels template). The second is to reinstate the first edition price information. This is on almost every Christie page and, in my view, is of interest when talking about original publications of novels. As a book collector, I know it is of interest to people of my community. I don't think my changes make the article GA but with so little literary criticism out there of what is a relatively minor work of Christie's, I'm not sure it will ever reach that stage!--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 14:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to the pointer to WP:LEAD and the info re the </br> tag. I'll make the necessary changes to this and the other Christie pages.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 14:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Reviewer's Award

		The Reviewers Award
		I hereby bestow this Reviewer's Award upon User:Yllosubmarine for her generous and incisive reviews of WP:Good Article candidates. Wikipedia is enriched both by her comments, which help other editors to improve their articles, and by her assistance in recognizing good content in the encyclopedia. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Creatures of Impulse

We've had a go, and I think fixed everything. See what you think? I couldn't use citations for Victorian newspapers - they're just too far from the modern standard - but I did my best to make it consistent. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

There are, however, some things that can't be done - scholarly comment on Gilbert's short stories is largely lacking. I probably could get something published, but the lag time is rather excessive for most of the dedicated journals, and waiting for original thought to be published could be an annoying delay in GA =P Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Creatures of Impulse

I just wanted to say thank you for your nice comments and helpful advise at Creatures of Impulse - it was an excellent and productive review, and I hope that you'll consider doing more for us, because your reviews really did help improve the article =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 16:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Straight from the horse's mouth - Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SandyGeorgia#Hi.21__Ref._Q -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Maria. I know you didn't require them, and I certainly don't mean any critcism of you at all. I have found other GA reviewers, however, who did very forcefully "recommend" them. I'm just pointing out that SandyGeorgia, who gives the thumbs up or down to FA candidates, made the somewhat surprising statements that she hates the templates and wishes that people did not use them. That's a pretty amazing piece of news that I think all Wikipedia editors who intend to bring an article up to FA level ought to know. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

for your feedback, I will keep the article on hold for the seven days and see how far it has come along at that point.--Finalnight (talk) 06:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Worlds End State Park

Ruhrfisch and I are working on Worlds End State Park for hopefully FA status. It's currently up for Peer Review. Could you take a look at it for us? Dincher (talk) 14:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Dincher (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Another opportunity

Hey there. Are you still beating yourself up for missing the peer review of Louis Lambert? Well, stop! I've just finished another Balzac reconstruction, La Peau de chagrin, and it needs intelligent eyes. I know you're probably still swamped with the new house, but maybe you'd like to do a peer review? – Scartol • Tok 20:40, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hair thanks

Hair has now been promoted to GA. Thanks again for your valuable input on the article. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

GAC on Hold, Jason Beghe

Hey, thanks so much for taking the time to do the GA Review. I went through and did my best to address each of the points on your list, save for how Beghe's recent commentary has impacted the Church of Scientology overall, I agree with you that it is probably too early to tell and thus that angle has not (yet) really been covered much in secondary WP:RS/WP:V sources. Please have another look at the article in consideration for WP:GA candidacy, and let me know if there is anything else in particular I can work on. Thanks again, Cirt (talk) 04:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Coordination

Ha. Sorry, I dint realise that that was only for the May 2008 election and thought I was signing up 6 months in advance. I deleted it and will wait for the next election. My fault, and I know its a pain but this would have been my first election, so I'm new to the whole nomination thing. Sorry for being a problem. Who won by the way?? The man in the mask (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC) Congrats on your win. Im not sure how to start a new task force, but I will look around. I have already signed up to coordinate the Crime and Fantasy Task Forces at the Job Center, and would love to do the same for historical fiction if I ever get it off the ground —Preceding unsigned comment added by The man in the mask (talk • contribs) 20:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Historical Fiction Task Force

I know that you are probably sick of hearing from me, but I have just submitted a request for a historical fiction task force to be created and would love if you could put your name down for support. support from the WP: NOVELS coordinator would definitely help alot. Also take a look at potential WP: IRELAND and see if you like that. A pet project of mine. Now i'll stop bugging you. The man in the mask (talk) 22:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Peter Wall

Hi. I've tried to respond to your concerns about this article at FAC. I also just did a major revision of the lead, which I think improves the article significantly. I'd be grateful for any further comments you might have. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 07:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Editing

I didn't "alter anyone's comments". I just put a done check mark in front of a couple things that had been done. If you would step back and not take it so personal, you would see that it makes it easier to see if the task has been done or not with just a glance. It makes the talk page more readable. You make something out of something that is not there. If you would have done it you would have thought it was a good idea. IP4240207xx (talk) 18:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2008 Newsletter

The May 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) 20:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Your comments on writer Ebner

Hello María. You put the Failed GAC comments on the discussion page of Klaus Ebner. Based on your comments I tried to improve this article to hopefully create a really good one. I also asked for linguistic help, since I am not a native speaker - all main contributors to this article seem to be German or Austrian -, and User:Jacob696 was so kind as to do a linguistic review. However, he changed very little and he would like a second review by another editor. In addition he questioned the quotations I put in to give examples - I took them from one single story, because there is an English translation on the author's website and because I didn't want to make a "monster article"; but the passages were meant as "examples of his work" as you stated. I'd like to ask you directly if you would do a linguistic review (because you stated the "poor prose") and to give your opinion about the quotations - should they remain or be deleted? Thank you (y gracias) for your endeavors. --Irina Walter (talk) 19:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for your words. A copyedit would be great. New hints for improvements on the discussion page, too. Maybe those first so I can improve the article before a linguistic review. BTW I've already done a bit, with your suggestions in mind.--Irina Walter (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Request for help

If you don't mind and have a few minutes to spare, would you be willing to take a quick run-through of the prose at Nathaniel Parker Willis? I sort of impulsively nominated it for FAC before taking the time to go through it carefully and, frankly, I've learned that copy editing here is not my specialty (what is?). --Midnightdreary (talk) 22:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Mary Shelley

Qp and I have finally managed to bring Mary Shelley up to the peer review level. We would really appreciate hearing your thoughts on the article! Awadewit (talk) 12:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Creatures of Impulse

		Creatures of Impulse Barnstar
		Thanks for your careful, detailed GA review - with your help, Creatures of Impulse managed to become an FA a mere month and two days after its creation! You came by at a critical time, and I think you deserve this barnstar =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thanks! The article could not have progressed as smoothly without your help. Next up: Trial by Jury - moving towards FA. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. As we prepare Trial by Jury for its FA nomination, we would certainly find any comments from you helpful. Trial is an important article to the G&S Project, because, to some extent, it will serve as a template for the other 12 G&S shows (although Trial is a little different, because it is the only one-act G&S show). -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. Your insightful review was very helpful in pulling it up to the necessary level. [Quietly edits the template above, because he got to you before the idea struck him =)] Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 17:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Environmental articles

Thanks for your continuing contributions to articles on environmental groups and personalities. And thanks for tidying up after my contributions to same! Dwalls (talk) 18:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hell's Gate

Hello we-all-live-in-you. I have improved the article somewhatt, but unfortunately there is not that much written about it, judging that this is Africa. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 22:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Also, just want to tell you: At the Sharkface MFD, you have been indirectly claiming that I have been involved in that stupid award center. THIS IS NOT TRUE, and my GA noms were honest attempts. It's just a bizarre coincidence, but then again, it is an "award center". Like they mean anything.I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 05:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, that teaches me not to edit while half asleep! :) I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 14:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 18 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert Sterling Yard, 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.

--Gatoclass (talk) 06:48, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXV - June 2008

The June 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. SteveBot (owner) 05:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I just wanted to say hello, and that I am dreadfully sorry for what I did, everything was un called for, and I do hope that you may one day forgive me for everything I have done. Congratulations on becoming lead coordinator, and perhaps the next election will be more of a success, more candidates, more voters etc. I wish to rejoin the project, and I hope to work with you in the future. Will Thompson (talk) 05:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Luck? Luck has nothing to do with it, human manner, how one ascociates with others, that is what matters, I will be fine, note that I say I will be fine, no room for error. I do hope that we can work together, I haven't seen any evidence of Kevinalewis' contributions, is he still working? Will Thompson (talk) 05:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

TBJ

Thanks for your always excellent comments (I'm trying to help with Elaine Paige). I probably won't get to this until late tonight or tomorrow, but I'll go thru them. Can you help with what the previous commenter was saying about the reference formatting? (bane of my existence). Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Super! Thanks! Any advice on what I can look for to satisfy everyone on the Discography issue? See the discussion at the FA review page. This discography is really the only thing like it in the world, providing comparative reviews on practically every G&S recording ever made. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Do you have more comments on Trial, or are you ready to vote? All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Notices of chances to research articles

They give wikipedia editors the chance to ask the author questions to improve the article (so it is a legitimate use of the talk page). They can be removed when they are out of date. They take up very little space. They are in no way commercial. When the programs are broadcast, a link to the site where the author can be heard discussing the very book that is the subject of the article can be put in the article. A valuable service. Relax. Editors should think twice or three times before sending messages to bona fide editors, it often sounds priggish and it makes everything more unpleasant. EdQuine (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

The talk page is the place to alert editors that they have the chance to ask the author about the book before the show is made. The article is the place to provide a link after the broadcast so users can hear the author talking about the book that is the subject of the article. It does make sense and it is an attempt to be helpful to editors. A few lines on a talk page. Hardly an abuse of wikipedia. EdQuine (talk) 15:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Elaine Paige

I did what I could to help the editors there. If you have time, can you take a look? -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:28, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Logical quotations

Thanks for letting me know about this; I'm not too familiar with it, so I guess I shouldn't have made changes to quotations without reading that primer first. Those changes weren't all the changes I made to The Big Lebowski, but they were probably the majority. Avalyn (talk) 15:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Gänzl quote in Trial by Jury

I think the quote is useful to pull the reader in, but it's not terribly important to me that we keep it. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 17:20, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

hi

I just wanted to say hello to a fellow librarian :) Saw your name on the Zelda Fitzgerald FA -- was cruising by, looking at recent promotions. Hurrah for gin fizzes. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 02:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you know if...

Hi. I recently made some changes to an article called Private (novel series) which we discussed a few months back. One of my additions was to add a table to the "Book releases" section. Since I couldn't find any sort of book table that would allow me to include summaries of each novel (and believe me I've searched all day), I had to use an "Episode list" table instead (which is probably intended for television). The only problem is that it forces the titles to be displayed in quotation marks.

I was wondering if you knew of any book-specific tables similar to this, or any other sort of table that includes a box which allows for a description beneath the statistical info. I doubt there is one, but just thought I'd ask if you'd ever encountered such. --James26 (talk) 23:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion.--James26 (talk) 18:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Faidherbe Bridge

Hi thanks. this has been getting confusing regarding GA review transclusion. please can you tell me where the instructions are, i thought i had followed the instructions per wp:GAN as the template has been updated but it looks like they may need to slighly more joined-up.Tom (talk) 21:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Trial by Jury

Thanks for your help with the article. It's been promoted to FA. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

More GA process concerns

Maria, is this request as troublesome to you as it is to me given some of the discussions about similar "favors"?
Jim Dunning | talk 04:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to be clear I explicitly stated that I have no experiance in reviewing articles. I thought he wanted help. Anyway why didn't you or Dunning at least raise the issue on my talk page? Why d'you have to let me find out this way? I wrote that he use a peer review and sort out any negative, crufty stuff before the GA process. There were no favours. I too became suspicious and now I'm having doubts that the article should have been passed for GA. I suggest you look at the discussion again before wrongfully suspecting me. Lord of Moria _Talk ^Contribs 13:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Maria, I made this response to Lord of Moria on her/his Talk page:

LOTRrules, my question to Maria was not focused on you at all, and I'm sorry I created that impression. There have been some discussions about questionable GARs in which it appears some editors may be working in concert to promote articles despite quality problems. I don't know that the other editor's actions are of a similar ilk, but her/his post to you raised a flag, especially since the article she/he just promoted has issues that should have been resolved before it was listed GA (and the article she/he is campaigning for has serious in-universe problems). It's clear from your response post to the editor and history here that nothing on your part was questionable. Again, I'm sorry I wasn't more clear.
Jim Dunning | talk 13:26, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films June 2008 Newsletter

The June 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. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Michael Jackson

Hi, you commented at a previous FA review of the Michael Jackson article. Currently the article is at peer review and I will be renominating the article for FA at some point soon. I would really love to know what your opinion is of the articles quality now, either at the PR, the article talk page or even my talk page. The current PR hasn't drawn much attention so I'm in real need of feedback. I hope you can contribute an opinion to this article. Thank you, regards. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 17:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Literature discussion

Hi Maria,

Thanks for all your help; you are clearly a real steward of the lit articles on Wikipedia. I'm impressed that you're going for the Ph.D. - what's your area of focus? I've loved the few grad English classes I've taken; I just wish there was more work in the humanities! If I had the same modest amount of aptitude for computer science, I'd be fighting off programming jobs... DiderotWasRight (talk) 02:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

José Sarria GAN

I've done quite a bit of modification and also responded to some of your suggestions. Would you mind taking another look at the article and tell me if you still have any concerns? Thanks. Otto4711 (talk) 03:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

12 basic principles of animation

Ok, it turns out that "Illusion of Life" is in fact available online on Amazon (I must have checked the UK site first), so I've been able to add some refs straight from the horses' mouth. This means a less heavy reliance on Blender and Willian (I totally missed that weird 'n' there). I kept some of them though - I'm aware of this blanket scepticism against wikis, but the fact is that he covers the topic better than anyone else, often being more comprehensive than even the original authors themselves.

As for background and reception, I've added this too. Remember though, that this is not an article on the book (which has its own article), simply on the 12 principles. Too much on this aspect of the topic would be a violation of GA criterion 3b - unnecessary detail - so I've kept it to one, substantial paragraph.

I believe your fail was a bit premature; keep in mind that quick fail should only be used in extreme cases, such as complete lack of sources, which is clearly not the case here. I trust you will have another look at the article now though, and that I won't have to go through another nomination process. Cheers! Lampman ^{Talk to me!} 14:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I was not critisicing your review, which I found helpful. It is simply a matter of process, since quick fail is defined as failing an article "without going through the on hold process"; something which is normally discouraged. Lampman ^{Talk to me!} 15:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

"Suffer the Little Children" reassessment

Your comments on "Suffer the Little Children" were very interesting and useful. It's a long way to go from here, but your comments will give me a step in the right direction. It will probably be a long time before I get it reassessed, but I thank you for answering my request for constructive criticism. Thanks! --MwNNrules (talk) 22:46, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Comin Thro' the Rye?

Hi scholar-friend, how are the summer months treating you? I was planning on making an attempt at WP:FAC with J. D. Salinger in the near future. It's a good article already, reviewed by Awadewit so hopefully pretty close. She suggested it still needed some expansion of the Literary style and themes section. I wondered if you had any time to take a look or thoughts at how best to organize that section/what's missing from it? --JayHenry (talk) 00:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the helpful Salinger tips. I think I'm one library trip and a couple hard hours away from making a run at this one... I definitely agree with your suggested division. I'll have to get in touch with User:Hobbesy3 first though, who did almost all of the work back in November, but hasn't been very active this year. Too bad, a good editor... Silly real life...

All goes well for me. Summer is good times--better this year than the last several for a variety of reasons. As for the sun, well, I'm afraid I lucked out with a complexion that turns almost any amount of UV-rays directly into a tan :P How's homeownership? --JayHenry (talk) 05:41, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

GA review of Flocke

Hello, I performed the Good Article review for the article on Flocke. I have placed the review on hold, as I had two (fairly minor) concerns. Please have a look at the review when you have a chance and get back to me when you've had a chance to look into the two issues. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 19:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello again, I have passed this nomination, but I'm having a bit of trouble. I can't figure out what category it fits in at WP:GA. My best guess is "Cultural phenomena, movements and subcultures", but that seems like a strange place. Do you have any idea? Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I've asked for feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the assessment of Jaz Parks series; I wasn't expecting anything more than Start class. --James26 (talk) 13:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

And thanks for the table with colours. I've replied at the forum. --James26 (talk) 13:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The Fabs

Ever thought of adding your name to this list? Being as nice as you are, you would be very welcome :)--andreasegde (talk) 15:03, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: GA review of Robert Sterling Yard

It looks pretty good. There may be some questions about comprehensiveness but I'm no expert on the subject so I don't know. Gary King (talk) 17:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

A-class

How/where does one nominate an article for A-class? Or should I just request a peer review? Cheers, the_ed17 05:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Well then, what should I do for The Sword of Shannara? (I don't want to promote it myself--I'm a bit biased and may miss some thing(s).) the_ed17 21:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh. =) Alright then. Thank you! the_ed17 22:41, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Crane

Ooh... it looks close... just the pesky Literary Style section to go. Exact same boat Hobbesy3 and I are in with Salinger. Rather than tackling Harold Bloom I've been having fun tip-toeing through the tulips. I probably need to re-read Red Badge. I remember studying it in high school and not liking it. Our English teacher spent an entire class about how "red sun in the sky like a wafer" was an allusion (with heavy emphasis on the all so we didn't think she was talking about illusions, even though it was tenth grade and we all knew by then) to communion and some character's initials being J.C. was an allusion to Jesus. This teacher was so annoying that I've never enjoyed anything with really over religious allusions. --JayHenry (talk) 02:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Conrad is maybe my favorite author of all. A Conrad FA of some sort is on my long term to-do list. But that's an ever-growing list, so we'll see if that ever happens... Charles Marlow doesn't even have an article, which seems like a major oversight for a character in several great books. --JayHenry (talk) 02:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Robert Sterling Yard

Just put some suggestions on the peer review and I have to say that's some awesome solo effort you've got there. Not so much to say about the article in terms of addressing problems. I'm trying to attempt something similar with Tim Buckley (compare here and here) but it's looking pretty huge and i'm not even halfway done and i'm relying on two sources perhaps a little too much already! Something to do on a rainy day i guess. Keep me posted on problems in the Yard peer review but I'm watching the page anyway. Thanks. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 22:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

That's a good idea, but I still need to borrow the Browne book from a friend of mine! I read it ages ago but the details always fade quickly. Was it a compliment about the Jeff Buckley article being good or just a comment? I brought that through GA! I even made the stub for Dream Brother: The Lives and Music of Jeff and Tim Buckley too. The nature/wilderness project you've outlined seems like a pretty good idea and the specificity of it makes it all the more valuable. I always think book references help you sail through FA, surprisingly I think it's the only thing in an article people leave to pure trust! Sillyfolkboy (talk) 05:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Reader's advisory Review

Thank you for your insightful review!!! JohnRussell (talk) 12:34, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Very helpful! I am working on implementing some of your peer review comments right now :o)

JohnRussell (talk) 16:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Re Request

Hi Maria, I owuld be glad to take a look, though it will take me a few days, if that is OK. Thanks for your reviews at PR too, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Pendle witch trials

Thanks for your comments at this article's FAC. I've rewritten the lead in line with your suggestions. Perhaps when you have a moment you'd look at it again, and see whether you think it's any better now? Thanks. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment

Yllosubmarine, have you thought about the administrator tools? If you want to know why I'll explain further if you decide to accept or decline the offer. Rudget (logs) 10:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Rudget (logs) 13:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

End Peer Review of Readers' Advisory

I followed the directions here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review "How to remove a request"

for Readers' Advisory (which you reviewed, thanks again!) but the archive link on the article talk page is a "red link" and not pointing to the archive.

If you have any ideas how to fix this, that would be most helpful.

Thanks!

JohnRussell (talk) 00:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The page was moved to correct the title. So that messed up the Peer Review page. I just created a Redirect. So, no attention needed on this anymore. Take Care, John JohnRussell (talk) 02:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Bernadette Peters

Any interest in giving her a GA review? I'm leaving the country in 8 days, and I'd like to respond to GA comments asap if possible. The article was nominated on July 9 and it's not too long. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Well it turned out to be super easy for me: Jean did all the hard work! Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Readers' Advisory

You provided me with a great peer review for Readers' Advisory

I have expanded and cleaned up the article, and just listed it for as a Good good article nominee.

Wikipedia:Good_article_nominations#Culture_and_society

Since you are already familiar with the article, any more suggestions would be greatly appreciated. JohnRussell (talk) 15:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

José Sarria peer review

I have put José Sarria up for peer review. Since you did the GA review I would be interested in getting your feedback on the new material. Thanks. Otto4711 (talk) 21:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

dates

Maria, thanks for your enquiry. Please see my talk page for my response. Tony (talk) 16:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Grammar

Oops! I knew that! Many thanks! Intothewoods29 (talk) 15:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Oxfordian theory

I removed the Oxfordian theory GA as a WP:POINT violation, before I saw your conversation with the nominator on his talk page. Feel free to restore it if you think it's appropriate. AndyJones (talk) 17:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I object to this taking-the-matter-into-your-own-hands piece of outrage without checking the facts. I see you are involved in a conspiracy on this with another editor. You didn't bother to check it with me I see. I've already explained on my Talk page that I think getting academic minds involved would improve this article. That's my main objection to them, no one in authority has checked them. When they have, then that rests well with me. So kindly restore my GA nomination. Felsommerfeld (talk) 18:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you ought to know that you have been hoodwinked by AndyJones. I discovered today that he was one of the editors who supported the extra De Vere link in the William Shakespeare article and now he's got it into his head that my GA nomination is somehow an attack on the Oxfordian theory article. I think I get the picture. The powers that be should know about this violation of NPOV editing. Attacking a man's GA nomination I think warrants pistols at dawn! Felsommerfeld (talk) 20:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Just a note of thanks for your resolve in the matter of the Oxfordian theory GA. You saw through the real intent pretty darn quick and were not bullied or put off. After being wrongfully accused of Sockpuppetry by the above editor, who then canvassed dozens of administrators to support his mass deletions of properly sourced material and his attempt to have me punished by the wiki community, I am glad that you did not fall for such an obvious ploy. (Thankfully, those dozens of administrators also saw through all the dramatics and obfuscation!) Smatprt (talk) 06:18, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: Your Ga Reviews

Although I was unable to create a proper page for it, I conducted it on the actual talk page. Someone will notice it eventually. --Meldshal [T] {C} 21:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films July 2008 Newsletter

The July 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) 02:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Stephen Crane

Hi María. Thanks for the kind words. I have noticed and admired your work, and I will be happy to take a look at Stephen Crane later today. I'll do a peer review and perhaps make minor c/e changes as I go. Finetooth (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy to answer these two questions. Please let me know if you have others or if my responses here need elaboration.

• I see what you mean about the Cora-Taylor-Stewart-Crane (and possibly even Howarth) complications. What I was aiming for was gender neutrality, and I flinched at terms like "proprietoress" to refer to Taylor and "girls" to describe Dora Clark and other New York prostitutes. "Chorus girls" I view as an exception because of its specific meaning, which would be destroyed by "chorus women". It seems to me that using "Cora" instead of "Taylor" reduces her to a lower status as a person than her partner, Crane. If I were the main contributor to the article, I'd consider explaining the naming conventions and complications in a footnote rather than following the custom of calling her "Cora". The footnote could list all of the names she was ever known by and explain her own preferences. It's possible that she truly preferred "Crane" after joining forces with Stephen, but it's also possible that its use was part of the pretense of marriage that was meant to protect them from criticism. She did not write the "Cora Crane" biography (unless it was autobiography), and she might not have chosen her own tombstone inscription. Furthermore, even if she preferred Cora Crane, and even if she could tell us directly to use "Cora Crane" in the article, I would incline toward "Taylor". This line of thought leads me to wonder what her legal name actually was. What did the state of Florida call her?

• I think the lead is fine. The lead should summarize the main points in the article, should not omit any main points, and should not include information not mentioned in the main text. Your lead meets these tests. Finetooth (talk) 18:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow! It's even more complicated than I realized. It might help you to know that once before I made a similar argument here for Lisa del Gioconda, whom we think of as Mona Lisa. The counterargument of historical precedent carried the day, and it could be that you'll decide "Cora" is best on that basis. "Crane" would work, except that it would be confused with "Stephen Crane". Sigh. I might be slightly POV-ish on this subject. Finetooth (talk) 23:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Meetup

Wikipedia:Meetup/Tampa -- You're invited! Hires an editor (talk) 01:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Possible Gainesville meetup

I see you might consider attending a meetup in Gainesville. A few of us are talking about one, nothing definite yet. Are you interested? -- Donald Albury 11:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/Gainesville, Florida now open. -- Donald Albury 15:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Margaret Fuller

Thanks for giving me time to update Margaret Fuller based on your suggestions at GA review. Let me know how it looks when you get a chance. Thanks again! --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Leads

I'm afraid you've come to the wrong man on this one. I absolutely despise WP:LEAD. If I had a top-10 list for guidelines that I hate it would be way up there, and that's saying something because I generally hold all the guidelines in contempt (though I find it more productive to just go along with it rather than complain all the time). If it were up to me leads would be short, colorful — playful even — they would do nothing like summarize an article, but would instead serve as a teaser, ignoring every aspect of the article that's not interesting. Ah well... --JayHenry (talk) 23:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

And if it were up to me the mdashes would be spaced. They need room to breathe! I hate unspaced mdashes! --JayHenry (talk) 23:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Let it all out? <takes deep breath> Well, it all started my freshman year of college: I met this girl, smart, funny and absolutely gorgeous, (though as I'll come to share perhaps a little unstable) and... oh wait, what's that? That's not what you meant? Oh, the MOS, yeah. Okay, the thing I dislike most of all is articles with a gazillion citations. It really only ought to be necessary to cite stuff that might be challenged by someone who knows what they're talking about, not people who just ask for citations for the sake of citations! Yargh! --JayHenry (talk) 01:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Did you know? --JayHenry (talk) 06:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Nice work

Congratulations on your latest FA. Cheers! – Scartol • Tok 22:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• It's hilarious how long the FA nom just sat there waiting for ruhrfisch to chime in with an extra support! Congratulations on making possibly the most complete encyclopaedic article ever on RSY. And all for free! Sillyfolkboy (talk) 12:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Race Against Time (Lewis)/GA1

I have made the requested edits at Race Against Time (Lewis). It is ready for you to review again. maclean 03:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I just began the FAC for this article. I welcome you to continue its review. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Race Against Time (Lewis) --maclean 04:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Join the conversation

Hello again, Maria! Awadewit and I are coordinating a podcast conversation about writing and editing Wikipedia articles. Since we know you to be a conscientious and thoughtful editor, we'd like you to be part of the discussion. (It will take place via Skype – all you need is a headset and the free software.) If you're interested, please visit the scheduling page and indicate your preference. Cheers! Scartol • Tok 13:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

We've got a finalized date and time for the podcast chat, so visit the page and sign up to confirm! Scartol • Tok 21:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you on? My skype username is eric.piotrowski, so holler at me when you're online. Scartol • Tok 23:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Pilot (30 Rock) Peer review

I've just finished addressing the comments you made on the peer review for Pilot (30 Rock) and I would just like to ask if you think that the article is ready for FA. Thanks for the review. -- Jɑɱǐε Jcɑ 19:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

If you have the time to take a look

When To Kill a Mockingbird was on the main page, an editor called into question a portion of the lead that he felt was not properly cited. I disagreed, he feels it was not resolved, and we seem to be at an impasse. If you have a moment to get involved, please allow me to link to today's discussion, and the discussion on July 11. I would appreciate your comments in the matter. --Moni3 (talk) 20:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)