User talk:The Rambling Man: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 12:12, 11 April 2009

Archives

no archives yet (create)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of former championships in World Wrestling Entertainment

Your comments were addressed.--Best, ₮RU CӨ 22:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done The Rambling Man (talk) 15:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

USNA MOH

done. Left you 3 questions: first two items and the class year one. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responded. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done can you support now? — Rlevse • Talk • 20:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS I've asked the template coded to add "Class" back in. See User:Gadget850's talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guess we're waiting now... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's done but it's ugly. What about just "Class"? Just post on Gadget850's talk in the thread I started about what you want to do. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responded there. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He thought it ugly because Class and year are not aligned. but if you don't mind, we'll leave as is. Will change year to lower case. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of career achievements by Kobe Bryant

I've addressed your comments. Best—Chris! _ct 23:54, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done The Rambling Man (talk) 15:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

An image created by you has been promoted to valued picture status Your image, Image:Spotted Hyena and young in Ngorogoro crater.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 05:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clint Eastwood FLC

I have responded to all of your issues at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Clint Eastwood filmography. I need clarification on one of them as I'm not sure what you're asking. If you have the time could you please stop by and ensure there are no other issues? Thanks and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 21:38, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responded dude. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of TNA X Division Champions

Is there anything else you would like done to List of TNA X Division Champions?--WillC 22:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done The Rambling Man (talk) 06:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supporting the article.--WillC 07:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thank you for supporting and leaving comments for the article. It passed recently, and I've been meaning to thank all the ones that were involved in the process.--WillC 00:37, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How was the trip?

Finally realized you're back. How was it? bibliomaniac 1 5 22:49, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doing fine, helping to hold everything up while you were gone. bibliomaniac 1 5 20:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Capital letters in sub-list titles: the Story Continues

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (long lists)#"List of foos: People" or "List of foos: people"?, although I have my doubts as to how many people will contribute. Having said that, now that I've posted on WP:TRM, maybe I'm being too pessimistic. FWIW, I don't particularly mind whether capitals are used or not (perhaps my preference is based more on film / TV titles for sequels, which tend to use capitals), but it would be nice to sort it out, so I don't faff around moving pages all the time as the mood strikes me. Regards, Bencherlite ^Talk 00:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will go look. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

USMA Supes

Given superintendent is a formal title at the academies, should List of United States Military Academy alumni (Superintendents) have the "S" in upper or lower case? — Rlevse • Talk • 01:31, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you raise the point at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (long lists)#"List of foos: People" or "List of foos: people"? as I suspect your query is commonplace... The Rambling Man (talk) 06:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I think upper as Superintendent is an official position. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

USNA alum wrap up

Is there anything left for the MOH list? You have not supported yet. How about any of the other USNA alum lists? Thanks much for the help. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for all your hard work. But you did not support the MOH one, is something wrong with it? — Rlevse • Talk • 19:06, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tks. You can respond here to keep things in one spot, I have watches on yours and most crat and arb talk pages. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:10, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On hold

I don't quite get what the "on hold" section at FLC is for. Why aren't they just left in the main part of the FLC list? — Rlevse • Talk • 20:14, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's an on-going discussion (soon to conclude) on the FLC talkpage about redefining the criteria. Until the discussion is satisfactorily concluded, lists which would ordinarily pass are currently on-hold. I guess the directors will reassess the on-hold lists once the criteria are agreed upon and pass/relist accordingly. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I caught an error you didn't

I couldn't resist see this. Hehe. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy The Rambling Man's Day!

The Rambling Man has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as The Rambling Man's day!
For your awesome work coordinating FLC,
enjoy being the Star of the day, The Rambling Man!

Cheers,
bibliomaniac 1 5
00:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like to show off your awesomeness, you can use this userbox.

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Paulini Curuenavuli discography

I have addressed your concerns. Alex Douglas (talk) 01:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of One Piece episodes (season 5)

All your concerns have either been addressed or replied to. Regards, -- Goodraise (talk) 15:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. -- Goodraise (talk) 16:25, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

USNA alum topic

Input appreciated here: Wikipedia:Featured_topic_candidates#Lists_of_United_States_Naval_Academy_alumni — Rlevse • Talk • 19:35, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colleges of Cambridge

Just letting you know I left a message at Talk:Colleges of the University of Cambridge#Out of date. I know you nominated it at FLC, so hopefully what I've brought up won't be too much of a problem. I've been waiting for you to return and settle back in before doing anything about it. Regards, Matthewedwards : Chat 04:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

Special report: Interactive OpenStreetMap features in development
News and notes: Statistics, Wikipedia research and more
Wikipedia in the news: Wikia Search abandoned, university plagiarism, and more
Dispatches: New FAC and FAR nomination process
WikiProject report: WikiProject China
Features and admins: Approved this week
Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of Tab-ville boarding houses

Yes, should be good for a laugh... besides, I can then cut-'n-paste the format for an Oxford list, in the spirit of one-upmanship. Incidentally, I've replied to the Jesus FLC comments that you so assiduously made, if you get a chance to stop by. You may have some thoughts on a couple of them, particularly the sorting, and I'd welcome your views. Bencherlite ^Talk 21:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two FLCs

Can you look over my responses to your issues on my two current FLCs? Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missed it !

I missed it ... your name just popped on my watchlist! I didn't know you were back (not sure if that's A Good Thing for you :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the good wishes on my talk page. And, belatedly, let me add my "welcome back from your travels" message to your collection of such. --Orlady (talk) 22:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FLC nominations and reviews

Hi, TRM. You may not be aware, but the new Featured list criteria was implemented Sunday 5 April, 00:56 (UTC) following two weeks of discussion at Wikipedia talk:Featured list criteria#New criterion discussion.

I've gone through the nominations and have noticed you have !voted Support, Oppose or Neutral at the following nominations:

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Gene Kelly filmography (Gene Kelly filmography)

Please could you take the time to revisit the articles and candidate pages, and check them against the new Featured list criteria, and confirm/revise your !vote; any !vote made against the old criteria that is not confirmed against the new criteria will be ignored when the nomination is closed.

Additionally, the following nominations have received reviews from you, but no indication whether or not you support or oppose their promotion to WP:FL; if you could revisit these too, that would be much appreciated as the nomination will not have to be kept open any longer than necessary.

Finally, please accept my apologies for the brusqueness of this message; the same wording is being sent to everyone who has outstanding reviews, with only the names of lists being changed. Regards, Matthewedwards : Chat 05:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question re: article summary style, tennis

Hi, I am a relatively new user here at Wikipedia and I have been working to try to shorten some of the longer tennis articles. I made edits to Serena Williams which were deleted/reveretd completely as "unconstructive"; I was wondering if you would mind taking a look at my version ([1]) and letting me know what I might work on (in relation to the article as it stands) to try to make it more constructive. I am asking because of your past involvement in the tennis articles and based on your informed tagging of tennis articles. Thanks in advance. AlonsornunezComments 05:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alonsornunez. I've seen with considerable sadness the goings-on in various Tennis Wikiproject articles. It seems inconceivable to me that such a large project with so many keen contributors cannot produce a single decent article i.e. featured between them. Various edit wars and continual reversions have left the articles in very poor states, in particular the many biographies which go into absolute minutiae, paying no heed whatsoever to the summary style required of an encyclopedic article. I have also tried my hand at driving a few of these articles in the right direction but have myself been warned that changing articles from their current state breaks some kind of current consensus. While I will continue to try editing one or two articles, I fear that my attempts to produce a featured-quality article will soon be thwarted. So, in answer to your question, sure, I'll have a look but until the various RFCs, requests for mediation etc have any kind of resolution, I think most of us are wasting our time. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:40, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate and unconstructive edit summaries

Please stop saying "completely over the top level of detail for every match, every score, every tiebreak" in your tagging edit summaries because it simply isn't true. I'm sure you already know that no Wikipedia biography of a major professional tennis player has "every match, every score, every tiebreak" for that player. Exaggeration and hyperbole does not help anyone. Also, your edit summaries wrongly encourage the idea that information should just be deleted from long articles instead of being forked. WP:Summary specifically says, "In general, information should not be removed from Wikipedia: that would defeat the purpose of the contributions. So we must create new articles to hold the excised information." You should make this clear on talk pages or edit summaries whenever you choose to tag articles lest inexperienced editors be mislead. Tennis expert (talk) 12:12, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 143: / Line 143: @@
 Hi, I am a relatively new user here at Wikipedia and I have been working to try to shorten some of the longer tennis articles. I made edits to [[Serena Williams]] which were deleted/reveretd completely as "unconstructive"; I was wondering if you would mind taking a look at my version ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Serena_Williams&oldid=274953284]) and letting me know what I might work on (in relation to the article as it stands) to try to make it more constructive. I am asking because of your past involvement in the tennis articles and based on your informed tagging of tennis articles. Thanks in advance. [[User:Alonsornunez|<font face="Arial Black" color="Black">'''Alonsornunez'''</font>]][[User talk:Alonsornunez|<font face="Arial Black" color="Gray">'''Comments'''</font>]] 05:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 :Hello Alonsornunez.  I've seen with considerable sadness the goings-on in various Tennis Wikiproject articles.  It seems inconceivable to me that such a large project with so many keen contributors cannot produce a single decent article i.e. featured between them.  Various edit wars and continual reversions have left the articles in very poor states, in particular the many biographies which go into absolute minutiae, paying no heed whatsoever to the summary style required of an encyclopedic article.  I have also tried my hand at driving a few of these articles in the right direction but have myself been warned that changing articles from their current state breaks some kind of current consensus.  While I will continue to try editing one or two articles, I fear that my attempts to produce a featured-quality article will soon be thwarted.  So, in answer to your question, sure, I'll have a look but until the various RFCs, requests for mediation etc have any kind of resolution, I think most of us are wasting our time.  Cheers.  [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man#top|talk]]) 10:40, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
+==Inaccurate and unconstructive edit summaries==
+Please stop saying "completely over the top level of detail for every match, every score, every tiebreak" in your tagging edit summaries because it simply isn't true.  I'm sure you already know that no Wikipedia biography of a major professional tennis player has "every match, every score, every tiebreak" for that player.  Exaggeration and hyperbole does not help anyone.  Also, your edit summaries wrongly encourage the idea that information should just be deleted from long articles instead of being forked.  [[WP:Summary]] specifically says, "In general, information should not be removed from Wikipedia: that would defeat the purpose of the contributions. So we must create new articles to hold the excised information."  You should make this clear on talk pages or edit summaries whenever you choose to tag articles lest inexperienced editors be mislead.  [[User:Tennis expert|Tennis expert]] ([[User talk:Tennis expert|talk]]) 12:12, 11 April 2009 (UTC)