User talk:Vanished user adhmfdfmykrdyr

Netball

Hi Laura. I promise I'll respond to the message you left on my talk page yesterday, but for the moment can you please stop adding level 1 headers to the Netball article. WP:LAYOUT, which is part of the MOS, is quite clear in indicating that they should not be used in the article body. Start from level 2 and work downwards through the header levels from there please. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 11:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

No worries, and thanks for the prompt reply. If you're trying to cut down on TOC space, the TOC currently shows only Lvl 2 and Lvl 3 headings. But I've condensed a couple of heading names, which hopefully might help. Cheers again. – Liveste (talk • edits) 11:31, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Netball in South Africa

Hello! Your submission of Netball in South Africa at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SusanLesch (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Netball in the Cook Islands

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:04, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Appreciation for excellent work on netball articles

Even when you are backed up against a wall, teammates are available to receive a pass, so you can get back into the game.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In particular, I am very impressed by your work on Netball (and related articles): the improvement from this to this is extraordinary. This is an article on a core topic, and editors willing and able to improve such articles are rare: extensive understanding of the topic is needed as well as understanding the importance of reliable sources. You have shown both in your work Netball, and whatever the outcome of the GAN review, your improvements have made Wikipedia a better resource for readers across the globe. If you feel a warm glow about your contributions to this article, it is not mere pride, but thoroughly deserved. If you feel disappointed that your efforts have not been fully recognized, please take my comments as substitute for a barnstar: brilliant work! Such contributions are an inspiration to other editors, who can take the ball and run with it. Geometry guy 01:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. :) --LauraHale (talk) 02:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. In response to your request for further opinions, I would concur with the reviewer assessment that the "Netball around the world" section is unbalanced, and could be improved with greater use of summary style. For the Cook Islands, you already have Netball in the Cook Islands, yet it is not cited as a main article in the corresponding section. The discussion of Jamaica and South Africa may also benefit from the summary style treatment. Geometry guy 04:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I badly put in a second reviewer thing, even though it wasn't the reviewer asking for it because I don't think he and I are communicating. The netball country sections had been chopped down to a paragraph by country for the major netballing countries in each region. When this was done, it was still viewed as unbalanced and I just have no idea what exactly he wants for the section and how to make it smaller and more balanced. His suggestions of providing statistics by continent don't really work as those statistics don't exist, styles of play haven't really changed all that much over time, etc. I put the sections by country back as I kind of reached the point where I felt it would be easier to put it back and then figure out how to deal with it then to continue to make it smaller with out any clear guidance like: "Remove this section." "Make this section into one paragraph." "Summarize this section." Most of the GA reviews I've seen have been really specific on what the reviewer wants fixed. I'm just... extremely frustrated because I have no idea what the heck he wants in a way that I can make those changes or ask others to make those changes. The situation isn't helped by the fact that the other articles related to this aren't particularly developed and most lack sources. :( --LauraHale (talk) 05:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

If you had so much problem in interpreting these issues, than you could simply ask me for assistance and i'd pleased to do it by myself. How specifically i'd tell you that these sections are bulky in size, unbalanced and stuffed with unnecessary details, what you had to do just replaced the whole section with one or two paragraph sized summary, as there are already articles for each sub-section, similarly for the section major competitions, if there are articles for each competition/tournament than why you redundantly added tabular data about the results of these competitions. I really don't know why you're unable to understand these simple recommendations i made. Bill william compton^Talk 08:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Not part of the GAC. Stop making stuff up. KnowIG (talk) 10:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Communication via a text-based medium is difficult, and misunderstandings easily arise, especially where editors have different cultures, backgrounds, and experience. Sometimes "show don't tell" helps: I think it was a good idea that Bill william compton showed what he meant by shortening some of the "Netball around the world" sections. Geometry guy 17:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm grateful he has finally did that. It would have been much more useful if he had done that at the onset, when on Talk:Netball/GA1‎ the confusion for how to shorten became obvious. Live and learn as I think this is Bill william compton's first GA and that he's never written or substantially contributed to a Good Article before. (Not helped by the fact that this is also my first experience doing this.) Between his contributions and KnowIG's contributions, the article has gotten a lot better. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Reviewers, especially inexperienced ones, are often reluctant to make changes to an article, because it seems like a "conflict of interest" between reviewing and editing roles; however that COI is illusory as (1) there is a common goal of improving the encyclopedia, and (2) this is a wiki, so all edits can be fixed. It is unfortunate that such a core topic was taken on by an inexperienced reviewer, but that is the nature of the GA process, which aims to get it right in the end, rather than always the first time! Anyway, there are now plenty of reviewers commenting, which I hope will lead to a happy outcome. If the article has gotten better in the meanwhile, that is already good news. Geometry guy 22:12, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Netball in South Africa

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Greetings!

When did you become active around these parts? I thought you stuck to Wikiversity and your own wiki which, last time we spoke, hadn't been visited by an admin in over a month! ;) My signature above suggests you've been busy and that I should spend more time looking at who I'm making the bot template and not just the facts I make it put on the Main Page! Anyway how are you? How's Australia? It's funny suddenly bumping into you all of a sudden six months after the sreencastathon is San Francisco. I still can't watch Nerf gun adverts on TV without laughing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:05, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour

I am happy to see you Laura. We are not numerous as women in the sporting subjects in Wikipedia. If I can help you (in the winter sports) make sign, bonne chance --Geneviève (talk) 09:54, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

		The Friendship Barnstar
		For your most excellent efforts in Women sports, Geneviève will like to award you the Barnstar of Friendship.

Great!!! The best of the chances for the Award of the article Netball. Je vous souhaite la meilleure des chances, Best regards --Geneviève (talk) 13:47, 25 March 2011 (UTC)