User talk:G.W./Archive 4

Copy-edit down of Development of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion[edit]

I've copy-edited the page down to the "Staff" section. Let me know what you think. Eventually I'll get to the rest. Sdornan 04:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random Smile![edit]

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 01:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Smiles! There just aren't ever enough of them! Geuiwogbil (Talk) 01:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Knights of the Nine GA review, part 2[edit]

I've finished reviewing the article on it's talk page. Hope everything there works for you. Green451 01:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elder Cruft[edit]

Thanks for the encouragement! Most of the time AFD gets you attacked by people not complimented :) There are 16 left unnominated I think, but I'll nominate them soon, don't want to do them all at once, too many.

You may want to lead the way on those two you mentioned, as they are both either were or are nominated for GA, people may give me trouble with it. :) Also, I was able to do it quickly with the program WP:TWINKLE, couldn't have done all of this without it! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IT IS DONE, all but five were deleted, and now the topic is back to a reasonable size. Given the amount of out of universe information. So, I had some thoughts....consolidate those last 5 into a Universe of the Elder Scrolls series articles, and consider merging or deleting The Elder Scrolls Construction Set. If we do this, a big old Elder Scrolls featured topic could be a lot closer. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We are one step from a Featured Elder Scrolls Oblivion topic, since there is one that isn't either GA or FA in among the oblivion articles, and there is a great proportion of FA's among them. If you could get it to GA, it will be all set! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you could get Shivering Isles to GA status, there would be an Elder Scrolls Oblivion Featured Article! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know your frustrated by the Featured article of the day fiasco, but I still think you should get this article to GA so you can have a featured topic, the thing is so damn close! :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you will have smooth sailing getting the expansion article to GA (if there is enough material to do so), and then moving to topic through Featured Topic candidacy, as several fiction related topics have done so recently, like Halo and Castlevania, and there has been no anger or opposition. And have no fear, we are doing nothing wrong in improving these articles and showing them off, its just a bunch of cranks that don't understand a quality encyclopedia includes every kind of article.

Also, about your question about merging and dividing up content, could you re-explain it with out abbreviations? I am totally lost :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As long as 1) The newly created expansions article wont be too big, and it wont hurt the Development of Oblivion article and hurt its Featured Status, it sounds like a good move. You'll trade one B class and one GA for one GA and then probably FA. I say, go for it. I'll support you on the talk pages if you need it.

Also, if you need any help protecting that Oblivion Featured Article that has cleanup tags on it, let me know!.

And just so you know, I think it's only TFA that has cranks bothering people, not anywhere else. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 02:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your copyedit request[edit]

On 12 August 2007, you made a request to the League of Copyeditors for a copyedit of Development of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Because of a heavy backlog and a shortage of copyeditors, we have been unable to act on your request in a timely manner, for which we apologize. Since your request, this article may have been subject to significant editing and may no longer be a good candidate for copyediting by the League. If you still wish the League to copyedit this article, please review this article against our new criteria and follow the instructions on the Requests page. This will include your request in our new system, where it should receive more prompt attention. Finetooth (talk) 01:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Diocletian[edit]

Nice work! Dppowell (talk) 02:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to singlehandedly raise this article to GA status at the rate you're going. Be gentle with the "economic reforms" section (the only piece I wrote). ;-) Dppowell (talk) 21:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"...'Cause every little thing, is gonna be alright"[edit]

Sorry about the whole farce over this. Just goes to show you a bunch of whiners will attack anything they don't like, and haven't a good article themselves to show for it... Keep of the good work on those "worthless" video game articles, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 23:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for correcting that error on my library page. I can imagine myself merrily copying and pasting that one many times before spotting it! I'm impressed that you found it... thanks. Gwinva (talk) 22:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just followed it from a link of your userpage. I get ADHD on the web, always clicking and moving and looking obscure things up, and so I wind up in some odd places sometimes. I suppose it's the nature of the medium. I'm glad you didn't get perturbed by me stepping in there like that. Thanks for taking the time to send me such a polite note, Gwinva. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 22:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FAR listing[edit]

ESRB re-rating of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. JMcC (talk) 14:56, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maximian[edit]

On 27 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Maximian, 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) 03:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this may help[edit]

I don't know if you have seen this but I found it one of the most helpful things for article wirting - User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Diocletian[edit]

LOL... did you mean that nicely or was the review too intense? Not to worry, I'm not offended. It's a great article, on a very interesting man. You've done great work. I don't do full reviews on things other than things I enjoy reading about, but when I do, I tend to be very picky, so I apologize if I offended you with being picky. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Epic Barnstar[edit]

		The Epic Barnstar
		I hereby award this here Epic Barnstar to Geuiwogbil, for getting Diocletian to Featured status..an epic struggle :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Casliber! It's very epic ;) Geuiwogbil (Talk) 22:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something for you ...[edit]

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For responding positively and with good humor to comments about Diocletian, during the Maximian featured article candidacy. [blush :)] --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 18:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that article still needs a copy-edit, huh. ;) Thanks! Geuiwogbil (Talk) 18:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep :))) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 09:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maximian FAC[edit]

FactotEm[edit]

Still going through the last sections, but you're welcome and thanks for the barnstar. I hope the CE helps. CE notwithstanding, there are a few content issues that I'm finding not quite up to scratch for FAC, which I've noted on the article talk page. I don't have any of the sources so can't do anything but flag them myself. Cheers. --FactotEm (talk) 19:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you check this edit to make sure it is factually accurate? If it's wrong it needs clarifying who returned to Constantine's court as it's not clear who "he" refers to. --FactotEm (talk) 19:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the whole, no, nothing of any great concern. The article could do with another run through for the real picky details (e.g. removing the redundant trailing "s" from the possessive forms of names that end in s - I believe it should be, for example "Galerius' (not Galerius's) war against Maxentius"). You alluded to the purple often, which I tended to remove because without an explanation your average reader won't understand the significance of the colour to the Romans, but there is still at least one instance of this surviving in the article. Also, I never like the use of the word "throne" when it comes to Roman history. It is probably more acceptable during this period than the Principate, but I still want to check through for that. And my last two edits were just the result of reading random sections and realising that my edits have introduced less than stellar prose, so on that basis alone another reading won't go amiss. I'll have another look with fresh eyes in the next couple of days, but you're pretty much there as far as I'm concerned. If I haven't updated the FAC page to this effect in the next couple of days, feel free to prod me. --FactotEm (talk) 21:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done all I can do. Good luck. --FactotEm (talk) 09:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Davies[edit]

Nope, not entirely. I'm not happy with: (1) the choppiness of some sections; (2) the copy habit of telling people what you're going to say before you say it and (3) lack of clarity in places. Rather than doing a copy-edit by proxy (long lists of things to fix, which are then duly fixed), I'll give it a copy edit myself starting either this afternoon/evening or tomorrow morning. this'll probably take 24 hours or so to complete. I'm light on sources for this period though so it will style only. Fair enough? --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 09:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problems :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought but what was Diocletian's education like? --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to say that I'm finished with the copy-edit. I've left a couple of hidden comments and tried to work incorporate the sense of what you mentioned on my talk page about Maximian's stupidity. You may wish to modify this to reflect the sources. Otherwise, I don't think I've broken the sense anywhere but you will be a better judge of that. Feel free to edit mercilessly anything that offends you :) Just leave a message if there's anything you need input on. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 19:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ping! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 22:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bleep! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 04:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ding dong! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 06:43, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chirp! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 20:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ealdgyth[edit]

I don't have access to a lot of JSTOR, unfortunately. The local university, while it has access, has some very odd gaps in what they subscribe to and what they don't. To get full access, I'd have to go to the University of Illinois, which I haven't managed to find time to. I wish I'd written that last night though, I spent the afternoon at the local U mining through JSTOR (what I could) and would have gladly looked up things for you. I don't think I'll be able to go back for a while, unfortunately, I'm going to be traveling quite a bit shortly, and finding the time to get there is difficult during the week. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A list of topics would be fine. If you have specific articles you want from academic journals, (and as long as it doesn't get TOO long) that would help too. I'll just print it out (you can email me, my email is enabled) and put it in my "research bag". It may be a while, I should warn you. Unless I make it there this week, it'll be middle of May at the earliest. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist[edit]

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, article logistics, and other tasks.
We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention.
The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 07:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article[edit]

Thanks so much for all your work on the Maximian article! It's very well-written and extremely thorough. I can say with only slight hyperbole that this may be the best introductory article on Maximian ever written, and you should be proud. You really help to promote and advance Wikipedia's reputation with such great work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.102.202.248 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 19 April 2008

re: Constantine I[edit]

Thanks. I only realised this when I saw a picture of a coin from the 330s with the name Constantinopolis on it. I guess that the different elements - unofficial "New Rome"; official (according to some) "Second Rome" - got mixed up somewhere along the way in many popular history books. Iblardi (talk) 20:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

notice[edit]

Hey, a user nominated The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion for FAC here. Since you're a primary contributor, if you feel the article is not ready, you can halt the nomination. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 01:35, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Machinima[edit]

Has that reference you added actually been used in the article?--Drat (Talk) 10:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)[edit]

The October 2008 issue of the Military history 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) 23:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion[edit]

Why don't you archive those discussions instead of removing them? Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 23:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No you didn't trouble me. I saw your edit summary at the recent changes page. Yes, you can call me by that name if you want (I don't mind). Have a good day! Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 00:06, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)[edit]

The November 2008 issue of the Military history 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) 16:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Corpse of Lucien Lachance. Oblivion 2007-07-11.png)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Corpse of Lucien Lachance. Oblivion 2007-07-11.png. 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. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)[edit]

The December 2008 issue of the Military history 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) 03:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]