User talk:Espresso Addict
Espresso Addict is currently semi-active and might not receive messages in a timely fashion.
- 1 Thanks
- 2 Vítor Aleixo
- 3 Precious
- 4 Portal:Cheshire/Newest articles
- 5 Thanks for the work on Three Studies
- 6 Portal:U2 for peer review
- 7 Epstein–Barr virus
- 8 ITN/C
- 9 Portals
- 10 Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote
- 11 Cheshire portal link
- 12 The Wikipedia Library's Books and Bytes newsletter (#2)
- 13 Isobel Harrop
- 14 Books & Bytes New Years Double Issue
- 15 A barnstar for you!
- 16 Userfy request for John Helfers
- 17 Peer review request
- 18 Books & Bytes, Issue 4
- 19 Portal:Literature at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates
- 20 Wikipedia:Featured portal review/Basque
- 21 Jac Schaeffer
- 22 Some thoughts on ITN
- 23 Books & Bytes - Issue 5
Apparently I've not only been away from the wiki, but have ignored the news: I had no idea that Ali Maow Maalin had died until I read the article. I threw down a stub there what seems like a looong time ago, and was genuinely touched that someone had done the research to expand it so impressively. Thank you for your work. - BanyanTree 06:23, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Just letting you know I am nominating Vítor Aleixo for CSD via A7 as the subject fails Wikipedia:NPOL and there is no outside claim for notability. I had initially tagged BLPROD, in a subtle way of giving the author a chance, but seems he didn't get the hint. Thought I'd give you the courtesy of letting you know since you had put work into it to remove the BLPROD tag. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- thanks for the explanation. I only looked at the one edit that came up in the red box in the tabs at the top -- sorry for the misunderstanding. Perhaps if future if you are modifying another's edit and not simply reverting it, then to do so in one edit will reduce the chances that other editors will make the mistake that I made in not viewing the edit as a whole. -- PBS (talk) 10:05, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- No worries. Thanks again for the explanation. -- PBS (talk) 10:16, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the work on Three Studies
|Sorry about the edit conflict on ITN. Thanks for doing a really good job fleshing out the article :] Helixer (hábleme) 17:50, 13 November 2013 (UTC)|
Portal:U2 for peer review
I would also like to remind all members of WikiProject U2 (and other interested editors) that U2 Live at Red Rocks: Under a Blood Red Sky has been put up for peer review (PR) by Dream out loud (t · c) on 10 November 2013; see discussion. Any feedback would be much appreciated!
- Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of WikiProject U2. You are receiving this message because you are a volunteer at Wikipedia:Portal peer review, you have contributed to the development of the portal, or you are an active member of WikiProject U2. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 14:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your input on the EBV naming discussion. Your comments really catalyzed a change in my attitude on the en dash and I've altered my suggested changes to uniformly use the en dash in EBV-related pages. I'm embarrassed by how hard I was fighting and hope I did not come across as too much of a crazy-person. If you have time I hope you may be able to look over the suggested revisions (listed in a table towards the end of the Talk:Epstein–Barr virus page. Thank you again Walternmoss (talk) 03:27, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- Fixed. Let's get this thing posted. — C M B J 10:21, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Hiya. Thanks for adding a portal here. You made a slight mistake though - portals are not external links, but go in the 'See also' section, where I've now transferred it. Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 20:59, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis
I have been watching the valiant work you have been doing in adding this to Cheshire articles. I have never been sure about the use of this link; should it be added to all Cheshire articles? Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. I was not sure whether the link was to attract people to the portal, or just a sort of "badge". Most of the articles I prepare are not particularly touristy, so I think I'll leave it to you to decide which article to flag. And thanks for your comment about the CP listing buildings. I realise that I have been straying into your part of the county, and am pleased you are happy about that. There's a lot of very interesting stuff I have discovered! Cheers, --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:03, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thanks for notifying me. im afraid i agree, but i feel too close to the subject to argue either way directly. I did fix it up a bit. at least i wont contest the prod, which i sometimes do while also sending to AFD. I dont know her personally, but that damn photo grabbed me hard. i also am a fan of this kind of literature, so im obviously too close to be truly objective. i wish her well, and will be first in line to recreate the article (if deleted), if she gets more attention.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Books & Bytes New Years Double Issue
A barnstar for you!
|The Brilliant Idea Barnstar|
|Thanks for your help improving the Paleozoic Portal Abyssal (talk) 16:42, 21 January 2014 (UTC)|
Userfy request for John Helfers
Could you please userfy John Helfers for me? I had nothing to do with the original page, but I suspect he's notable and would like to take a look. (He's a coauthor with Tom Clancy  and Martin H. Greenberg and has written various sf books. Thanks! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 03:52, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Peer review request
Hi Espresso Addict, I saw you on the list of portal peer reviewers, so wondered if you would mind taking a look at the Channel Islands peer review request? Thanks, Matty.007 21:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Books & Bytes, Issue 4
This is a message to inform you that Portal:Literature (promoted to Featured Portal in 2006, delisted in mid-2013) is currently being considered for relisting as a Featured Portal at Wikipedia:Featured_portal_candidates#Portal:Literature. If you have any questions or comments, or would like to offer your support or voice your opposition, I encourage you to do so there. The FPO criteria can be found at Wikipedia:Featured portal criteria. Thank you, Sᴠᴇɴ Mᴀɴɢᴜᴀʀᴅ Wha? 07:51, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
- Any chance I could convince you to review this? The other reviewers seem to have disappeared, and I'd like to see it promoted soon, so I can move on to my next project. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:52, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured portal review/Basque
I'm a bit confused by your decline of the proposed deletion of Jac Schaeffer. You declined claiming that sources were present at the time of the proposal. However, no citations are provided, and the only apparent potential sourcing are two sites listed as External links. If those are references then the article should likely be updated to more clearly reflect that. However, even if that's the case one of those links is to IMDb, which is not generally considered reliable, and the other is to a promotional page for Schaeffer's feature film debut, which I'm not sure would be considered reliable for BLP purposes.
I'm not necessarily averse to the page remaining, but I think it's in rather sad shape as it is, and it's been maintenance-tagged since 2010 without any evident improvement. If you don't feel a deletion is appropriate, I would welcome suggestions. FWIW I did do an admittedly cursory search and did not find anything I felt could be used to improve this article.
Some thoughts on ITN
I hear what you are saying about losing enthusiasm when one's work is opposed. As one of the most prolific ITN writers, I certainly have experienced that situation a lot. Unfortunately, some people seem more interested in opposing everything they can then making the encyclopedia better.
I tried to look up some of "your" stories. Unfortunately, the search function doesn't work that well and I couldn't find them. I would be interested in taking a look at past nominations and/or look forward to seeing future nominations of yours. What I can say is that I find that the argument is the most important part of getting a story posted. A lot of people tend to assume it is obvious why people should support "their" story and don't say much. This makes it easy for lazy opposes. I have gotten some pretty unlikely stories (which have zero to do the the US) posted by making a really good argument.
I understand the position that we post too many sports. I happen to disagree (sports coverage takes up 20% or so of an average newspaper), but certainly am not looking to add more sports coverage. What I would like to do is get a better representative of what is important in the sporting world. As an American, it is absolutely wrong that we post things such as the Chicago Marathon that have no impact while (sometimes) ignoring items like NCAA basketball which is massive here. I don't know which way the NCAA item will head, but the timing of the nomination was wrong - it should have been nominated when it wasn't fresh on everyone's mind so that it could be properly assessed. Assuming it is not approved now, and I am successfully at getting some other American items removed, would you be willing to go neutral on NCAA basketball's inclusion? --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)