User talk:Resolute

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Congrats on finishing it. I'll be watching the FAC intently. :) Connormah (talk) 00:56, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Don't just watch, review! ;) I was actually ready a while ago but delayed because I knew I wouldn't have the motivation to help out with reviews of other FACs. Resolute 14:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Pretty busy unfortunately over the next few weeks - perhaps after Christmas I may be able to. I haven't been at FAC for a long, long time though, so it may be better to defer to the regulars in this case. Connormah (talk) 14:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the protection of the Oilers article. Was considering it. Sad days as on Oilers fan... Connormah (talk) 20:20, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

WRP and Smith[edit]

Hey sorry, my bad. You are absolutely right about not jumping the gun on edits. I'll go and change my edits to Next Alberta general election and 28th Alberta Legislature as well. Bkissin (talk) 20:37, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

So, this guy ...[edit] doesn't seem like a vandal. He's made some productive edits. But he's made a ton of boneheaded ones, a bunch of wrong ones, and a bunch of blanking, too. This looks like a bit of a competence thing, but a look at his talk page and plainly several editors (myself included) have tried to get his attention and failed. Since it's plainly not a vandalism-only account I can't take it to AIV ... any advice? Ravenswing 04:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 29, 2015[edit]

A summary of a Featured Article you nominated will appear on the Main Page soon. I had to squeeze the text down to a little over 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank (push to talk) 19:23, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Offhand, I would say that encapsulates his career pretty well. Cheers! Resolute 19:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, hope to see you again soon at TFA. - Dank (push to talk) 19:37, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Working on it... ;) Resolute 19:50, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

As You Requested[edit]

This is the whole forum discussion:

The creator of the NHL lore page has confirmed that he is metalnation1984 in the thread I have provided. TheGRVOfLightning (talk) 03:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. I'll read through that at some point to help get an idea of the basis for some of the article decisions. Cheers! Resolute 03:15, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Maurice Richard[edit]

Congratulations on bringing an article of key importance to hockey's history to featured article status! isaacl (talk) 13:32, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Hooray! Thanks for the help with the copy edits and such. Most appreciated! Resolute 14:40, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

This Is Hard.[edit]

In the NFL lore's case it's easy to tell majorly memorable moments from non memorable as many sports networks cover it and there are many forums dedicated to the NFL.

The NHL is difficult to do. Coverage of the league is spotty and there are too many moments. Weeding out the best is a difficult process and unfortunately bias creeps in.

I am willing to admit I added the Ducks comeback (I'm a Ducks fan.) and it was clear bias. It's also problematic that although we shouldn't use Primary Sources it seems like the NHL's "History Will Be Made" series would be a useful determination. However, Only the OFFICIAL NHL commercials meaning ones uploaded to NHL's YouTube Channel should be considered and even then only the major ones (e.g: Bobby Orr's Flight in the Stanley Cup Finals after winning Boston the cup)

Thanks, TheGRVOfLightning (talk) 23:40, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Challenge is good for the soul! I want to work on a couple other things first, but I do have some books that can help formulate a rough guideline. I'll be back to that topic soon enough. Cheers! Resolute 23:42, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
It differs from place to place; where I am, there is generally no shortage of books in the library and bookstores covering hockey history. If your local library offers access to ebooks and other online resources, then you may have access to a wider variety of sources than you realize. Good luck! isaacl (talk) 04:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)


...on the promotion. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! And thanks for the review! Resolute 00:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Offering my congrats as well! Great work! Connormah (talk) 05:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Great job! Let's get some more hockey articles that golden star, eh? Gloss 06:05, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

About 750[edit]

I'm pretty sure their main account is at least indeff'd - I opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Okip. Perhaps not the best evidence, but seems likely. ansh666 19:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, there's a name I haven't heard in a while! I think you're on to something there. Certainly comparing Okip's final edits to 750's current crusade results in some very loud quacking. Resolute 20:04, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Yep. I had some help, though I'm not sure from who. I think CU is going to be declined because there isn't enough evidence to link We all kip (talk · contribs) to any of this, but given their penchant for self-reporting alternate accounts, I wouldn't be surprised if it was. ansh666 20:07, 17 January 2015 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

See [1] - I'm notifying on the OP's behalf. AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Tks; responded. Resolute 14:17, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mark Giordano[edit]

The article Mark Giordano you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mark Giordano for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Response to your question on ANI[edit]

Presumably, as editors--until otherwise is necessary. There are many, many eyes on anything surrounding the whole debacle: the wheat and chaff will out eventually. Closing ranks and forbidding edits in favor of banned editors' outright puppetry isn't always the best option. Have faith in the community. Heck, have some faith in new and returning editors! :) God, it's been forever since I edited; sorry if I did this improperly. Bearsfordays (talk) 01:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I have faith in the Wikipedia community. I have none in KiA and the like. And in my long history with this site, I have never once seen the sudden arrival of IP editors, sleeper accounts and new accounts to a specific topic area to be anything but bad news. As an individual, you might rise above. But the mob that is promising and promoting harassment will not. Resolute 17:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


Benedict XVI & Bud Selig[edit]

MLB seems to have taken its idea from the Vatican - Pope-emeritus & Commissioner-emeritus ;) GoodDay (talk) 18:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Follow-up question[edit]

Hi, Resolute. I saw your comments regarding flag icons at the Village Pump talk page discussion. Got a quick question for you: Can you share the short version of when you believe the use of flag icons is appropriate? I have wanted to tackle the flag icon issues for several years, both from the perspective of reducing obviously inappropriate uses (e.g. demarcation of natural geological feature, event locations, etc.), but also of providing explicit sanction for their use in certain situations where the article subject represents a country in some form or fashion (e.g., Olympic athletes, military personnel and units, members of national sports teams, etc.). Over the last three or four years, I have done my best to remove over use and inappropriate uses from articles (e.g., sports tournament locations, navboxes, succession boxes), while preserving what I believe are core appropriate uses (e.g., Olympic athletes, ship registries, etc.). I'm looking for an experienced ally or two to co-sponsor an RfC on point in the next several months. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:09, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


Though I'm in agreement with you & Djsasso, concerning the Balitcs. I'm hoping you both now, can understand better, my frustrations of the past in this & other topic areas. GoodDay (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Which is why I generally say just stay out of the area. Not even fully sure why I bothered engaging with this latest fellow. -DJSasso (talk) 15:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Seeing as he (and those in agreement with him) is going to stalk & revert my random corrections, I've little choice in the matter. GoodDay (talk) 16:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2015[edit]

Banff is lovely this time of year[edit]

Hey Resolute! I'm trying to help a librarian with the Banff Centre get in touch with Albertan wikipedians who might be interested in an editathon the Centre is putting on in March. I'd love to go, but it's a bit of a drive for me from Vancouver. I thought I'd mention it to you. Regards, The Interior (Talk) 16:14, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2015[edit]

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter[edit]

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Australia Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)