User talk:Derek.cashman/Archive 5

Davenport, Iowa GA Review

How come the article wasn't put on hold, so I could have a week to fix it? Also, how much more needs to be added to the history and neighborhoods section. Another user told me they were too long, so thats why I created a page for each and summarized them on the main Davenport page. Ctjf83^talk 20:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I suppose...I'll contact you with any questions I have regarding making it a GA...is that ok with you? Ctjf83^talk 21:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

does the project go with city-data.com as a reliable source? Ctjf83^talk 21:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Where can I get a map that I can use of Davenport and the Quad Cities? as people have said they could use a map Ctjf83^talk 06:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you have an answer for the maps? Also, do you want me to list all 10 city council members? I don't see a point in that Ctjf83^talk 22:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, can you look it over again before i GAC submit it? To make it a bit easier to see the changes, you can look here I don't know if infrastructure has enough in it or not let me know! thanks! Ctjf83^talk 08:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you have time to look it over? Ctjf83^talk 23:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Well? does it pass now?? Ctjf83Talk 19:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Is the article good now or what? Ctjf83Talk 19:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what else to add to the economy section? I can't really find anything. Ctjf83Talk 22:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Help with the economy section? Ctjf83Talk 01:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Check the page out now! I added a bunch of new pictures, and added a bit more to the economy section. Ctjf83Talk 03:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello?! have you looked at the new page yet? Ctjf83Talk 18:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thats about the best I can do with the last two pics. If need be, I can remove one, probably the water company pic. If you think the Putnam Museum pic should be moved as it overlaps the "Events and festivals" section, I can remove it. Either way I'm planning on taking a picture of Bix Fest in late July. Ctjf83Talk 18:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I mostly agree with the caption thing so I shortened some of the longer ones up. If you want me to get rid of the sourced price of city hall in the pic, I can, but I think image captions should have interesting facts like, as long as they don't get too long. A lot of times I just look through pages for the images to learn what I can briefly. Also if you want, let me know what needs to be done for an FA Ctjf83Talk 18:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

That was a typo it was 250|px instead of 250px Ctjf83Talk 20:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, sounds good! If you get time someday, can you list me some details on my talk page on what it needs to get to an FA? Ctjf83Talk 20:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Lake Winfield Scott GA Review

I've made the requested enhancements. Take a look. Thanks, Majoreditor (talk) 15:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Majoreditor (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Newsletter

Another excellent and informative issue. Cheers! EyeSerene^TALK 10:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for running the article "On Hold versus Failing an Article". It's helpful. Majoreditor (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Impressive as always. Good work, Derek! Lara❤Love 15:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

GA newsletter

Hi Derek,

How does one subscribe to the GA newsletter? I haven't the time to assess articles at the moment (I did for a while), but I like to track the process. Help? Montanabw^(talk) 01:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Newsletter Coding

May you give me the code that enables the GA newsletter to have the hide/show option. I would like to do it to add it to the WP:PWN. May you add it or give me the code please? Cheers =)--TrUCo⁹31¹ 03:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok, thanks =)--TrUCo⁹31¹ 13:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

One thing, I can't find the code that makes your newsletter have the show/hide feature...--TrUCo⁹31¹ 14:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I changed it, but one thing. The newsletter looks smaller, can that be fixed. Look at WP:PWN the February 3rd edition of the newsletter.--TrUCo⁹31¹ 17:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I see, but if you compare this version to the old version, the wording/font is bigger, and the newsletter was wider, can i fix that somehow?--TrUCo⁹31¹ 17:33, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Im using firefox as well, but do you see what I mean. If you scroll up on my talk page you will see the original newletter format, and you can see it is wider.--TrUCo⁹31¹ 17:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Newsletter

I saw the newsletter on someone's talk page, but I couldn't find a link anywhere to add me to the mailing list. How do I do this? -- Matthew Edwards | talk | Contribs 04:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

GAN Reviewer of the Week

		The Good Article Medal of Merit
		Congratulations, I have chosen you as my GAN Reviewer of the Week for the week ending 2nd February 2008. Epbr123 (talk) 10:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Good Article review

Do you think you can review No Way Out (2004) article? Zenlax ^{T C S} 20:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Neilston GA review

Hello Dr Cash,

Just a nudge that I've replied to you at Talk:Neilston. I hope this helps! Thanks, -- Jza84 · (talk) 17:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I've also raised your point about public services (electricty, waste, water etc) and completeness at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography/How_to_write_about_settlements#Power_and_resources. Thought you might want to pitch in? -- Jza84 · (talk) 21:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

This has since been addressed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_UK_geography/How_to_write_about_settlements#Public_services - a new section of the WP:UKCITIES guideline. Hope it helps.

Given it's now the 9th, I've since left a note at GAC asking for wider input to secure GA status for Neilston, I hope you don't mind. -- Jza84 · (talk) 00:05, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Wal-Mart

You know, I can't see anything wrong with the Wal-Mart article now. Morenoodles (talk) 05:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Putnam County, New York

Hi. I when you reviewed this article, you put it On Hold for further improvements. Now that I have addressed the issues to the best of my ability, over ten days have elapsed, which is over the 7 day limit for On Hold. If you get the chance, would you mind taking care of it? Thanks. Juliancolton (Talk) 16:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Based on what I can find in libraries and on the internet, anything significant in the county's history stops at the war. I'm sure I can add when roads were built and minor things like that. If you can give me one more day, I can add more info. Juliancolton (Talk) 16:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't think of things like that. Sure, I can add those things too. Juliancolton (Talk) 16:42, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FormerLouisvilleFlag.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:FormerLouisvilleFlag.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Tel Aviv

Hi. Apart from the citations, and lead points, I think I have addressed all the revelevent points you made here when it was a Good Article Candidate. If you could have a look and let me know Id really appreciate it. Thanks. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 12:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Following Tel Aviv's third failed FAC, I have worked on the issues brought up and renominated it for a peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Tel Aviv/archive3. Thanks. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 11:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request

Hi Dr. Cash, I was looking at the list of peer review volunteers and was wondering if you could please look at List of municipalities in Sullivan County, Pennsylvania, which is up for peer review here? If you are unable to look at it I understand, but could you please let me know either way? I would be glad to peer review something of yours in return. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for your peer review - the list is now at FLC. Please let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Google logo

An editor has nominated Google logo, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Google logo and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

2008 Northern Illinois University shooting

Keep up the great work man!  :) Jmlk17 00:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Please join us in the Talk page regarding the addition of the article to the List of massacres. Thanks! --ElKevbo (talk) 02:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

We'd also appreciate if you'd remain civil. Thanks! --ElKevbo (talk) 02:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Careful with the reversions and please remember the 3RR. Holler if you need help but please remember to bring disputes to the Talk page. --ElKevbo (talk) 16:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

This is an abuse of rollback. Please don't use rollback to revert good faith edits. John Reaves 01:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Haifa

Hi. I think Ive addressed/explained all the points you made here apart from citating and the lead point. If you could have a look and let me know, Id really appreciate it. Thanks. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 14:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Merger

Calm down. I added the tag because it was on the Stephen Phillip Kazmierczak article and being discussed on the talk page. So, it belongs on one relevant page, but not the other? Give me a break. Right now, I personally don't have an opinion on it, so I'm letting others discuss it. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 17:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

You didn't even click on the "Discuss" link in the tag, did you? Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 17:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:NIU huskies ribbon.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:NIU huskies ribbon.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Superm401 - Talk 17:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:NIU huskies ribbon.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:NIU huskies ribbon.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. _→AzaToth 17:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC) --_→AzaToth 17:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Stephen Phillip Kazmierczak

There was—and still is—clear consensus to merge. Next time, discuss it on the talk page and let someone else, less emotionally invested perform the action. User:Dorftrottel 21:30, February 15, 2008

Speedy deletion of Template:VaBeachInfoBox

A tag has been placed on Template:VaBeachInfoBox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

3RR warning

You've now exceeded three reverts on Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guideline. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Derek.cashman_reported_by_User:bkonrad_(Result:_). older ≠ wiser 17:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I have watchlisted this page, and if you revert again, I will have to block to stop this edit war. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

NIU massacre

Merci. Aujourd'hui, maman est morte (talk) 15:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Separating references and notes

I am concerned that the heading "References" in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guideline is the problem. Because the term references is ambiguous and can refer to both notes from in-line citation and to other works, I think that it leads to confusion. The advice: "Many editors use "Notes" as their preferred title for the footnotes section, as the same section can then hold both source citations as well general notes." from Wikipedia:Citing sources#Section headings seems quite appropriate. --Bejnar (talk) 22:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Steven Kazmierczak

Hi there. I just wanted to point out to you that you are coming pretty close to violating the three-revert rule. I'd suggest you let the article stand as it is now for a day or two and let things settle before you go back to removing the Video Games section. Thanks. will381796 (talk) 18:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

• If you took the time to read what I wrote, I did not accuse you of violating RRR. I clearly said that you were coming close to violating the three revert rule. More than three reverts in a 24 hour period = violation of the three-revert rule. You had made 2 reverts (in part or in whole) of the video game section in less than 24 hours. With the way the two of you were going back and forth on this section it would have been very easy for you (or him) to have made the two additional reverts on the section. And sometimes, when situations get heated, editors don't pay attention to what they've done in the past. I get annoyed with edit wars and edit warriors and would like to prevent them when possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Will381796 (talk • contribs) 21:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Song Thrush

Many thanks for GA review! Jimfbleak (talk) 18:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments in edit summary regarding NIU shooting

I find your comments very inappropriate and highly unnecessary in your recent edit summary to the article Northern Illinois University shooting. I was the "dumbass" who separated them. The section was becoming too bloated and mixed up and hard to read, thus I broke down into sections that actually made sense. In trying to improve an article on an event near and dear to my heart, as well as a dedicated Wikipedian for two years, I don't appreciate my edits being referred to as "lame" or being labeled a "dumbass". Thanks. Abog (talk) 21:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree with Abog. I noticed your edit summary too and it, combined with other comments I've seen you leave on other user's talk pages, leads me to believe that you need a refresher course on what it means to be civil. Please read up on this. Things tend to be a lot easier for everyone involved if everyone involved is nice to each other. will381796 (talk) 21:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Apologies accepted. I, too, am guilty of being quick to accuse IPs from time to time. So, let's all try to be a little more careful now. Abog (talk) 22:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Newsletter article

Are we going to have one for upcoming issue? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't have any ideas. I am occupied by GA drama past 2 days. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 02:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I drafted an article on WP:LEAD, which was mentioned a while ago as a possible topic. It needs a copyedit, though, and is a touch too long. Geometry guy 22:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

	<font=3> Thanks for your peer review - List of municipalities in Sullivan County, Pennsylvania made featured list! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps update

This is a form message being sent out to all of the GA sweeps reviewers. Thank you for all of your dedicated work in the difficult and time-consuming task of ensuring the quality of articles within the GA project. Many reviewers have taken time out of reviewing articles at WP:GAN (this may be one factor in the expansion of the backlog), writing articles, and probably getting some sleep! I have sent this message out to update you on our current progress and to remind you to please keep up with completing your reviews and updating GARs/holds. As of March 1, 2008, we have swept 20% of the 2,808 GAs we started with. At our current progress, all of the articles will be assessed in just under three years (based on when we started). If we want to complete the sweeps sooner, we need to continue reviewing at a higher rate (consider doing one or two more reviews a week or whatever you feel comfortable with) and inviting new, experienced reviewers. If you are taking a break, focusing on GAN, writing your own GAs, or are already reviewing articles like crazy, I still want to thank you for all of your hard work and hope you are pleased about our current progress. Keep up the good work and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

APO Notables...

How does oen become a 'notable' person on the APO list? Josh.Pritchard.DBA (talk) 06:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Next GA newsletter

I'd be interested in writing something for it. Got any suggestions? dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Ohana suggested to me writing an article about how individuals can or should delist articles. Would you like to write such an article? Geometry guy 00:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

"Notable residents" lists

I notice you are removing 'notable residents' lists from various individual community pages in the DC area and referring folks to the common list of 'famous people' from the area. In many (maybe all) cases, the "local" and "central" lists aren't the same and you are removing substance along with redundant material. It's good to streamline things but I think it'd be a good idea to take the extra step to conform the lists before deleting. JohnInDC (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't take issue particularly with your conclusion that they are better lodged in a single place (though I have to add that as to Chevy Chase at least, vandalism is infrequent and typically corrected within an hour or so). My objection is that you are removing the lists, and the information contained within them, without bothering to see if the information you are deleting is in fact present in the "master" list. Which it in fact isn't. It seems to me that if you are going to undertake the task of housecleaning and consolidation then you are obliged at the same time to ensure that you are not haphazardly removing presumably accurate information at the same time. JohnInDC (talk) 21:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. An actual consolidation was all I was after.

As an aside, though - setting aside the merits or demerits of such lists generally, do you really think they are better managed centrally? I watch Chevy Chase, Maryland because I live there and am in a reasonable (if imperfect) position to track unsupportable edits or vandalism. Changes don't come through very often but when they do, they're fixed quickly by me or one of (probably very few) editors who track it. But I'm not going to bother watching an omnibus list of famous people in and around DC - it's too much, and what do I know about who lives in Springfield, Virginia, anyhow? I would be surprised if monitoring is actually *better* with a centralized list - JohnInDC (talk) 22:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Why did you....?

If I may ask why you blatantly took away the notable residents on the article Waldorf, Maryland? I find it extremely domineering; maybe you could’ve at least mentioned your reasons on the talk page? --Jayson (talk) 15:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Jason specializes in harrassing people, hasn't added any useful content, nd aspires to being an administrator to make it simpler to harrass people. Perhaps you should deal with him. Tedickey (talk) 23:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Nazi human experimentation

I have a few questions about what direction you think the article should go in since you failed it as a good article. As the nominator and one of the more active contributors of late, I was disappointed but agree with everything you had to say. My first question is about citing documentaries, I looked through WP:CITE and didn't see anything pertaining specifically to documentaries or films. So could you point me in the direction of the proper template? Secondly, and more importantly, you said that the article felt incomplete without any mention of the aftermath of the experimentation. I was wondering if this was in regards to the physical aftermaths of the victims or if you meant something more along the lines of the aftermath that resulted in the Nuremberg Code? I'm assuming you meant the physical effects of survivors, which is hard to come by as most died and many who survived were unwilling or able to talk about them (which makes things a little harder for me). I look forward to any advice or suggestions you have and hope you take a quick peek at the article as I've done some work on the easier parts of your suggestions.

I'd also like to apologize. The joy of the "new message bar" has to be dimmed when its about a subject as depressing as this. Thanks in advance. AniMate 05:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I've implemented several of the changes you suggested. I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look again and tell me what you think. AniMate 01:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Obama on the Hussein page

Can you explain why you are so intent on keeping his name off of the page. Instead of giving opinion based perspectives such äs "fearmongering" and "republicanizing". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.185.205 (talk) 03:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

So you have no intellectual answer and just accuse me of being a vandal. I would be a vandal if you had a legitimate reason to keep him off that list. You take him off again, and I will get an account just to make sure all Presidents are removed from pages of their middle names, because that's clearly what you think is NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.185.205 (talk) 05:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review idea

Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog.

There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).

If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Middlewich GA review

I think that we've addressed the issues you raised in Middlewich's GA review. Perhaps when you have a moment you'd take another look and let us know what you think about the article now. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I've reorganised and re-ordered the sections as per your comments. Hopefully you'll agree that it's more sensible now. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the review; I was getting a little anxious towards the end there. :-) Your suggestions definitely improved the article I think. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Brisbane

Unless someoen else is working on it, you can go ahead and delist. I don't have the time/energy for that article right now. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 07:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Haifa

Thanks for those comments - now we have something to work to at least. I will work through them all carefully, and, if you dont mind, will contact you when we are ticking those boxes. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 16:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I've had a go at the geography section, history section, and medical section. How do these now look. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 17:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Ive also looked at expanding the demographics, neighborhoods, adding to climate. Information was added to expand the government section, - just culture is being worked on. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 10:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Dr Cash, is this now getting there? I think culture is holding it back. With the recent Tel Aviv FAC in mind, I am very hesitant about adding travel sources to cite claims, and so am struggling to find any sources for any information I can add here. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 17:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Tel Aviv

Hi Dr Cash, I think the issues you raised at the Tel Aviv FAC have been addressed. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 18:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The ideas you put forward at the Tel Aviv talk page sound fine to me - I just dont know how to go about making them happen and the article NPOV - could you perhaps help. Thanks Flymeoutofhere (talk) 16:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I've had a go at addressing them now (during which the tag was removed as I didnt know where it should go - hopefully no longer needed) - is this ok? Flymeoutofhere (talk) 17:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Geelong GA review

Hi, I agree with what you added to Geelong's GA review. Do you think your stuff is necessary for GA, or are they just suggestions for the future? Just wondering because it's my first GA review. I unfortunately don't think they're going to make GA this time, because the week's almost up and they've still got changes to go (esp. fixing the 404 errors in the references), but they have done a great job so far. Somno (talk) 00:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Mangalore Artcle

The mangaladevi image of Mangalore artcile has been given the required copyright tag. All your suggestions for GA artcile has been implemented. You may now take a stand omn the GA status of this article --Crazysoul (talk) 10:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Forensic Entomology

Quick thought.I haven't read much of these lengthy texts yet but I see some very serious problems.Too many problems. I know that many students of FE in many countries use the Wikipages on this subject and those on Diptera(also damaged in this odd exercise) and precision of expression is essential.This is a legal and logic arena and many students are working in a foreign language.Amongst professionals the language problem is a constant. This is a tricky subject where words count and there are too many here.All the best Notafly (talk) 22:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Unassessed pharmacology articles is empty

Wow, I guess you've been busy :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

History of aspirin review

I've addressed the issues you pointed out in the GA review; see Talk:History of aspirin. Please let me know whether you'll have a chance to take another look at it, or whether I should relist it at GAC for another reviewer.--ragesoss (talk) 06:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and the edits!--ragesoss (talk) 00:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

GA newsletter

Gguy's asked me to jot down some thoughts on article delisting for the newsletter: I've done so here (feel free to move/edit/etc as required!). All the best, EyeSerene^talk 12:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I've moved it to the editing desk. I hope that's okay and there aren't any other plans for the April essay. Geometry guy 17:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries if there are - it can keep ;) EyeSerene^talk 18:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Please give me a few days, I'm very busy. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Your talk page archive

Just to let you know that you accidentally created a talkpage archive in the mainspace. I've moved it and corrected the reference. Stifle (talk) 18:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Haifa GA

Hi Dr Cash. I think I've addressed the points you left on the talk page regarding Haifa's GAN. If you could let me know. Thanks. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 16:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Dr Cash, just to let you know that seeing as I havent heard anything, Ive renominated the article. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 19:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Clutter of benzodiazepines

FYI: Thank you for intervention. My initial complaint about several benzodiazepine articles to involved authors: Please stop cluttering the benzodiazepines with a collection of refs to arbitrary pubmed articles. Those are largely reports of some experiments, which have been carried out sometime, somewhere and for some reason on rats, mice and brain slices. For almost every such article you will find a match which comes to contrary conclusions. Please limit the contribution to agreed conclusions, as found in pharmacology books and the FDA profiles, avoid anecdotal reports, speculative results, could have, may be involved, has one time been observed, is suspected, is being investigated, could have a theoretical connection etc. Not everything which has sometimes been suspected, investigated, speculated or observed is relevant to pharmacology and should be included. Avoid bot-like inclusion of search results. pubmed is not a source but an Augias-Stable of unfinished research and a playground for students. Example: You conclude that chlordiazepoxide "is related" to quinazolines, by being investigated together with quinazolines in one citation. You conclude that it is a hapten, by being mentioned in an article about immuno assay tests. These are not relevant articles for pharmacology. Of course it is a hapten in an immuno assay test! That is how antibody based immuno assays work! But this has nothing to do with its pharmacology. Please limit yourself to agreed facts, like the FDA profiles. And the intention is to arrive at something which looks more like the FDA fact sheet. Example: You claim as a peer reviewed fact the HIGH abuse liability, because it is mentioned in a drug abuse article. FDA says low-to-medium abuse liability, placement in Schedule IV. You have included unrelated, anecdotal, spurious and loosely associated refs, frequently extracting false conclusions, presenting these as peer reviewed facts. In the course you have presented the substances as neurotoxic, carcinogenic, cytotoxic, causing necrosis of testes etc. These are not agreed facts. I propose we arrive at something closer to the FDA fact sheet. What has been done here is subtle vandalism. 70.137.178.160 (talk) 21:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Navenby GA Review

Many thanks for reviewing Navenby. I'm just going to take another look at it, but could I just ask a couple of questions please?

• "The history section pretty much stops around World War II. Certainly, something has happened in this town since then."

Ummm - not much! It is only a village, and has pretty much become a commuter village in past few years, as demonstrated by the figures in the demography section. Is it OK if I just keep the 'recent history' short, and quote a few facts?

• "Based on the UK cities guideline, the article should also have a section on 'public services'. Things like water, sewage treatment, fire, police, healthcare/hospitals, electricity, etc."

Totally agree, but Navenby is only a village, so doesn't have anything like this of its own, except a doctor's surgery, which I think I've mentioned. I did trying 'beefing up' this bit with some Lincolnshire-wide facts and figures - only to get told off during a PR for it!

• "The UK cities template also calls for a 'notable people' section. But I'm not too concerned with this." I did do a (very!) short one, but again got told off at peer review cos too stubby! I guess that because Navenby is only a small village, fairly off the beaten track, there haven't been many notables. I did dig out the singer Barbara Dickson, who lived there for about 18 months, but that was about all! (Hence the 'stubby-ness'!)

Sorry to ramble on! --seahamlass 21:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Navenby again... Just completed what you asked for...right down to notables! Please let me know what you think!--seahamlass 00:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou - and many thanks for all your little fiddly changes too. --seahamlass 17:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

GA review tips

Derek, I'm beginning to start my first review of an article for GA status. I was wanting to know if you had any tips or anything in particular I should keep an eye out for in regards to performing the review well. Any advice you could provide would be appreciated. Thanks. will381796 (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

• Hey, thanks for the tips on GA review. I did my first review today on Arlington Senior High School. Since its my first review I thought I'd put it up for a second opinion just to make sure I didn't miss anything. Feel free to provide any additional input. will381796 (talk) 23:38, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Shrewsbury GA Review

Hey, thanks for the review and edits to the article! I've attempted to address most of your concerns, apart from 'Climate' which I'm really stuck for. I've noted down the modifications on the Talk Page. Thanks, Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 10:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

So I've basically done most of what you asked now :) Just the climate section which is lacking, but I don't feel there's anything more to say, unless you want me to describe the English/UK weather for an international audience? Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 17:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Israeli Barnstar of National Merit
		Thanks for your thorough assistence during three FAC reviews of Tel Aviv and GAC review of Haifa Flymeoutofhere (talk) 11:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
		this WikiAward was given to Derek.cashman by Flymeoutofhere (talk) on 11:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Slim-pickens riding-the-bomb.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Slim-pickens riding-the-bomb.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC) --Ricky81682 (talk) 23:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

re:GA reviews!

thanks for your advice! Sushant gupta (talk) 08:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

GS Review in ArticleHistory

Hi, referring to Talk:Akhtar Hameed Khan, the article history template appears confusing as it does not reflect the relisting to GA. I couldn't find any helpful hints at template's page either. Could you pls help sort it out? so that GA doesn't appear twice in two different banners.--IslesCape^Talk 10:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Looks pretty tidy now. --IslesCape^Talk 17:22, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Aspirin peer review

I've requested a peer review of aspirin- it is listed as B-class in both the pharmacology and chemical compounds wikiprojects. However, I think that with some work, it could easily come to a point where it could be listed as an FAC. I'd encourage you to comment at it's peer review.CrazyChemGuy (talk) 22:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Navenby

Hello, sorry to trouble you, but I just wondered if I could ask a favour. You were kind enough to review and pass this article at GA recently, and now it is up at FAC. I've had to remove a lot of the photos, to fit in with FA standard, so it doesn't look quite the same, and the refs have been tightened up too. I just wondered if you could cast your eyes over it and decide if you could give your support to it? (It has two supports so far, and no opposes, so fingers crossed!). Many thanks, --seahamlass 09:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

• Hi. Moved up economy section, as per your suggestion, and then followed the basic layout of the Wormshill feature article after that. Hope that is OK for you!--seahamlass 15:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Reviews.

Obviously I'm not following the process properly, so I'll give it a miss. Sorry for messing it up. Cheers --Michael Johnson (talk) 03:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd hate to have written any more, because obviously I can't type fast enough to beat your eagle eyed reversals. You could at least allow 10 minutes for people to get their house in order before starting the whole reversal, censoring process. Never mind, as I said I am obviously not doing the job properly, and I really don't have the time to learn, so I'll withdraw from the process. I have two articles on hold - Joe Rice and Minority Treaties. I'll remove the on hold tags, but leave my comments. Editors may find them useful. Cheers --Michael Johnson (talk) 04:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Naaa that's all right. Thanks for the apology. I only started to do them in an attempt to reduce the backlog, as I'd nominated one of my own (since withdrawn). Obviously there is more to it than I thought, and I'll get back to the stuff I enjoy with the time I have. Cheers --Michael Johnson (talk) 04:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Slim-pickens riding-the-bomb.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Slim-pickens riding-the-bomb.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 13:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey

I think you may have missed my post above regarding the GA for Shrewsbury, so I thought I'd leave you a new message to draw attention to it. Apologies if you have actually seen it and are as stumped as myself! Thanks, Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 17:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I'll take a look at that, cheers for your help :) Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 19:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Geodon

Dr. Cash, I'm sorry to bother you, but my doctor perscribed Geodon to me because he thought I had schizoaffective disorder. I know I don't, but what I would like to know is why do I seem slower and is it the Geodon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bishopfries (talk • contribs) 20:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Authorised King James Version: GA second opinion

I've asked for a second opinion on this article. It was put up for GA in a bloated form with nearly 11,000 words of text, much of it written in an elitist style more akin to a paper for a learned society than an encyclopedia article. On my recommendations the editors have reduced the text to under 7,000 words - still long, but not unacceptably so - and have made the earlier parts of the text more accessible. However, large parts of the article are still written in dense intellectual prose, and I have serious concerns about its overall readability, even though in many ways it is a worthy and impressive article. I'd like someone with more experience of this type of article to look at it, and advise whether my concerns are valid. You may wish to look at it yourself, or put someone else on it. Brianboulton (talk) 22:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

WTF

Since when did we start doing the GA subpages thing? I hate it. Still. VanTucky 00:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for explanation. I think it wouldn't be so bad except it's practically impossible to find unless you already know where to look, the only link is the tiny innocuous one in the template. Thanks again, VanTucky 01:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Review of my review

Hey, I just did a review of King's College London and failed it. Since there were some comments regarding some of my previous reviews, I just wanted to see if you might be willing, if you have time, to look this over and let me know if I was correct in my decision: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:King%27s_College_London#April_2008_GA_Review. Thanks. will381796 (talk) 15:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate the feedback. will381796 (talk) 19:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Other ways to help out

Hello again. I was wanting to know if there's anything that I can do to contribute to the GA project outside of the reviews? I'm trying to get at least two reviews done each week. Is there anything else that the project needs help with? You guys put out a news letter or something, correct? Anything that a relatively inexperienced reviewer can help out with? Thanks. will381796 (talk) 00:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: GAN reviewer of the week

Thanks for the medal, I really appreciate it and I will continue on reviewing more articles, so they can become GA. Thanks again. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter

The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice newsletter

Kudos to you and OhanaUnited for a great WPGA newsletter. Best --Eustress (talk) 01:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Yikes i cant believe my names in there!!! Wow!!! Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 02:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

GAN Mentoring

Hello. Can you give me some help. Started to do a GAN for Twillingate, Newfoundland and Labrador. All the concerns re grammar, criteria and MoS that I can see have been addressed. It seems to fulfill all the 6 criteria outlined in the GAN templates/review criteria thingies. The editor has been very helpful. I re-read the previous peer reviews and automated peer reviews. It feels like I am missing something. Can you look over my shoulder and advise if the criteria have been addressed sufficiently for a pass. Thank you so much.SriMesh | talk 20:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. SriMesh | talk 00:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Review request

Hi Derek. Marriott School of Management has been renominated for GA status, having been improved from your suggestions. I thought you might want to be the one to review it...thanks! --Eustress (talk) 21:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration: Placebo

I see that Placebo has been listed at the WPMED project's collaboration as well as at the Pharma project's collaboration. I think that between the groups, there might be just enough editors to really tackle the subject. Would you consider signing your support at the MCOTW, if you're likely to have time in the next couple of weeks to help with that article? Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC) (PS: I'm not putting your talk page on my watchlist; I don't need a personal response to this message.)

Would like your opinion on GA review for White Mountain art

Hi there. I'm new to GA review, but I guess I know how to pick 'em. For my 5th review I chose White Mountain art. You may have seen the comments on the GAN talk page. The review has been rather confusing. I wrote a review, but neglected to check to see that it was still nominated. Although I found what I considered to be multiple issues with MOS, OR and POV, it had been passed by another editor, User:Jack Bethune. User:Malleus Fatuarum delisted it and I posted my comments on the talk page and put the article on hold. Jack Bethune, in turn, took my suggestions and recommended, disagreed with, or advised the principal author to disregard my comments. The principal author, User:JohnJHenderson is now understandably confused. So I'm asking for experienced GA reviewers to look at the article and the talk page and offer some kind of consensus as to what he should do to bring it to GA. I appreciate anything you can do. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 01:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

=Message from Bodhi Dhana

Hi Derek I see your name in the Sri Lanka place names etymology discussion . etymology presumably as a moderator, administrator or reviewer. I hope you would take a look and try to see if you can resolve the disputes or at least put in some editing restrictions. Or, if you are busy, perhaps you could ask an adminstrator or some one that you know to take some steps. Get back to me if this is not clear and you need more specifics. ThanksBodhi dhana (talk) 10:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Final review

Hello. I believe Marriott School of Management is now ready for your final review. Thanks! --Eustress (talk) 16:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I fixed the issues you listed on the page a couple days ago, and the article should be ready for another look. Thanks. --Eustress (talk) 15:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Review on Cluj-Napoca

I adressed all of your concerns, see the discussion at Talk:Cluj-Napoca for mai explaining, and the main article for the changes in all what you mentioned.--Danutz (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

GAN stuff

		The Good Article Medal of Merit
		For all your work in the GA project - thanks! :) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

And thanks for the award! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 09:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

R: Review Cluj-Napoca

I reviewed the Education and Sports sections, I saw that were your last comments. See now Cluj-Napoca#Education and Cluj-Napoca#Sports (allthough I would have prefered the table there, even as an aesthetic matter).--Danutz (talk) 17:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

discussion on wikiquette alerts

Hi, I saw this on Wikiquette Alerts and generally think this comment may be a little harsh: [1]. Anyway, I thought it prudent to advise you of that discussion, also. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 00:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Shit-eating son-of-a-bitch... bastard, douche-bag, twat, numb-nuts, dickhead! Sorry. It's Tourette's Syndrome; if you fake it, you don't have it,... ;-) Dr. Cash (talk) 15:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Heh...Ok, thank you so much for understanding. I figured you hadn't meant any offense. Many people (myself included) put pages on their watchlist and the only thing that shows on the list itself is the edit summary--so, they can easily be misunderstood. Anyway, I wanted to thank you for being civil! Happy editing. Lazulilasher (talk) 17:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, I wanted to note that I admire your work at GA. It takes a lot of effort to review an article and giving people feedback is invaluable (in my case, it's always needed...ha!). Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 17:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Heya (Related to Road GAs)

Just so you know, thanks a lot for the major imput, on the side of the hostileness. However, I do appreciate, as one of the NY Road Project's active members, I do get a bit overexcited over things like this. I do wish to have a discussion over what we can improve on. Also, it would be beneficial if you could maybe once in a while help us out. NYSR needs a new leader-of-some-sort since User:TwinsMetsFan left, and your kind of input is very much welcome. Now, NYSR has 39 GAs, we are trying to stretch to 50 (or at least a few are). If you could help by finding significant articles for opinions before GAN, it would be deeply appreciated, so we don't have to go through the numerous problems. If you help out, I can explain some of the situations that brought this up. Thanks again.^Mitch32^contribs 21:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Peer review of Meridian, Mississippi

Hi, Derek.cashman, I recently added the article about Meridian, Mississippi to be peer reviewed. I looked in the Geography list of volunteers, and you were the first to deal with cities specifically in the United States. If you have the time, input at the review page would be helpful. Thanks! --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 17:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Iron Man

You have lowered the article rating. Please use the talk page to address the issues that you feel warrant such a change. Changing a rating without explanation is not likely to encourage the edits you feel are needed. ThuranX (talk) 20:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

River Oaks

I couldn't find in the US City guidelines where library info should be situated, so thanks for fixing that. Somno (talk) 01:14, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Aspirin

Hi, about a week ago you set a deadline for aspirin, and you said you'd pass/fail it last Saturday. You haven't responded on the talk page; are you still planning to review this article? It s been on hold for almost a month now if you think about it. I think the article has improved a *lot*, and I've verified all of the references unless I missed a couple - it should be GA material now. I'd appreciate if you'd see if you think the same about the article. Thanks, and if you're too busy to review the article still just let me know. CrazyChemGuy (talk) 21:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Message on Cyclone Glenda GA

Your comment on the Cyclone Glenda talk page was confusing. Dates need to be Wikilinked, so to allow for autoformatting based on preferences. Personally I wish to see June 10 when I type June 10, but someone from the UK would want to see 10 June. Do you have any insight on something I am missing? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:19, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Picking your GAN reviewer of the week

I've been wondering for a while, how do you choose this? King iMatthew 2008 21:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Top Importance Chicago Articles

If you want to help me choose Category:Top-importance Chicago articles, come comment at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chicago/Assessment#Current_Top-importance_Candidates by June 5th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for Peer Review help

Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

GA subpage

Because GA nominations are now on a subpage, there's no way to access it after the bot archives it. I was able to fix the temporary Failed GA template, but when the bot archives it there's no way to go to the subpage again. Can this be fixed? Limetolime ^{talk to me • look what I did!} 00:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

John Benjamin Murphy

It seems another editor with medical expertise has gotten involved in the article. I get the feeling that he knows more about the medical sciences than I, but that I am a more experienced editor. I am treading gently on editing his contributions. However, I have tried to follow your advice.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I added another ref.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Osler

i would welcome your opinions on the changes needed on' sir william osler'. thanks.Toyokuni3 (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Reviewing the technical articles

Hi, please tell us your viewpoint about this issue.--Seyyed(t-c) 10:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Newsletter

Replied here. giggy _(:O) 13:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Polyclonal response

Hi! Somehow, I'd missed putting the talk page for the GA review of the article, so didn't realize that you'd posted your comments there. Hence, the delayed response and apologies. I feel, I've dealt with all the issues adequately, except for converting of bulleted points in one of the sections you'd pointed out. This I've left out as if I'd convert those points to subsections, there'd be no text to place under the main heading ("Significance of the phenomenon"), and also because, a user had once told me that those subsections were very small, and didn't deserve to be subsections. Moreover, it is a very small issue to deal with&mdashif you're convinced that they should be subsections, I wouldn't mind if you do it yourself, or if you'd like to wait till a consensus is built. On second thoughts, I feel, I'll convert them to subsections, and if someone raises objection to that, we can see what is to be done.

Thanks for your review; it was most helpful.

Regards.

—KetanPanchal^taLK 16:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Frank McGee (ice hockey)

I've reverted your delisting of this article on two grounds:

1. You said the article has no inline citations; it has 12
2. You said it only has three general/broad sources. I don't see where the number of such sources is a criteria.-Wafulz (talk) 20:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. No harm done.-Wafulz (talk) 20:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles newsletter

Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Milestone

Do you have the exact (if not approximate) date of the milestone when GA has 4000 articles? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 02:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I got it. It's on April 21 OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 03:00, 15 June 2008 (UTC)