User talk:Schwede66

Welcome

User:Schwede66	User talk:Schwede66	User:Schwede66/Sandbox	User:Schwede66/Contributions	User:Schwede66/Rowing	User:Schwede66/DYK	User:Schwede66/Tools
User	Talk	Sandbox	General articles	Rowing articles	DYK	Tools

Please add items to the bottom of this page. I will normally reply on this page to any conversation started here.

The MLC and the "suicide squad"

How about the "suicide squad" article be made a regular article not a project; it looks finished! Hugo999 (talk) 00:03, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

My plan is as follows:

• bring the suicide squad article up to DYK standard (referencing needs to be improved for that)
• finish the MLC list article and add sufficient prose so that it also meets DYK standards
• then publish both articles and submit them as one hook to DYK.

Sounds ok? Schwede66 07:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Now an article, see Suicide squad (New Zealand). The List article looks complete too Hugo999 (talk) 09:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Adding Pictures onto Album Articles

Hi Schwede - Thanks for adding that answer on my talk page about images. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 03:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for adding the photo's to the Cecil Wood article NealeFamily (talk) 07:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Good idea – just been to the fridge. I reckon articles with photos are much more interesting, hence I put quite a bit of effort into hunting for images. Schwede66 08:00, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

2011 end of year women's rugby tests

Hi Schwede66 - just took a look at this article and wondered about the name. I don't know a lot about Women's rugby but wondered if it would be better to have a title "2011 Women's International Rugby Tests" (I presume there is one called '2011 start of year' or similar that could be amalgamated)?. It must have taken a look of work to get all those stats - I take my hat off to you. NealeFamily (talk) 07:19, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the article title doesn't sound quite right, but I have had nothing to do with that article (other than fix a spelling mistake). When it comes to NZ rugby articles, I recommend you go to User:Mattlore. Schwede66 08:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I've passed it on to Mattlore. NealeFamily (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Based on the existence of 2011 end of year rugby tests for men's matches, it might end up being in the right place. I'll raise it with the rugby union project. Mattlore (talk) 20:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

doctors

That was mean, you strung me along and I made every necessary improvement and showed you everything I included was true with references and in good faith.LuciferWildCat (talk) 22:42, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiThanks

WikiThanks

In recognition of all the work you’ve done lately! 66.87.0.115 (talk) 20:53, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Schwede66 20:55, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of New Zealand general election, 1875–76

Hello! Your submission of New Zealand general election, 1875–76 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! Lihaas (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Matthew Richmond

Yep - just have a look at Special:Newpages. It lists all the new pages created in article-space as they come online. And it can be configured to show all new pages, too, if you so desire. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Replied to your Message

Hi, Schwede66 - responded to your message on my talk page. Is there a template for letting you know that? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 09:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Catherine Healy (activist)

I've replied in talk page. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 15:11, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK QPQ multi noms

Hi Schwede - I'll keep an eye on that conversation. Thanks, amigo! --Rosiestep (talk) 05:06, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Lascelles

Hi. What exactly do you mean? Eddaido (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

The 'normal' way of formatting a person's entry on a dab page would be [[somebody Lascelles]] (yyyy–yyyy) and not [[somebody Lascelles|somebody Lascelles (yyyy–yyyy)]], wouldn't it? But I did not mean to offend with my edit summary, in case you did take offence. I edited just one of those entries, as it showed square brackets (an obvious editing mistake). Schwede66 21:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It started because there was no other useful way to differentiate between a series of people with the same name and doing the same things so (if you were hunting for the right Henry Lascelles) it seemed best to make them, and then others, consistent. regards, Eddaido (talk) 23:35, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Dead link in article 'Mayor of Palmerston North'

Hi. The article 'Mayor of Palmerston North' has a dead link that could not be repaired automatically. Can you help fix it?

Dead: http://www.palmerstonnorth.com/YourCouncil/CityCouncil/Elections/Detail.aspx?id=704

• You added this in February 2010.
• The bot tested this link on 28 March, 30 March, 1 April and today, but it never worked.
• The bot checked The Wayback Machine and WebCite but couldn't find a suitable replacement.

This link is marked with {{Dead link}} in the article. Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!

PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding {{Bots |deny=BlevintronBot}} to your user page or user talk page. BlevintronBot (talk) 23:50, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Template:New Liberal Party

I came across Template:New Liberal Party and Template:New Liberal. Looks like an unfinished project of yours. I don't think there is a need for these footer templates for the New Liberal Party (New Zealand). Shall we delete them? Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:54, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

It will be useful to have a template much like Template:NZ Reform Party. I'll work on it. But it should be called Template:New Zealand Liberal Party (or with NZ in it), so both those early attempts can go. Schwede66 21:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I thought Template:NZ Reform Party was pushing it as a template. The same may apply to [[Template:New Liberal Party]. Wouldn't a "See also" section be enough? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Do you want to do a {db-author} on the unneeded template and redir? Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I've done the db-author business. But why do you say that Template:NZ Reform Party is pushing it? Where can I read up what a template should and shouldn't achieve? By the way, Template:NZ Liberal Party does exist already. Schwede66 05:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Chris Carter (politician)

Hi Schwede 66, Sorry to bother you about this. I have been trying to alter the succession box for the Te Atatu electorate but can't replace "incumbent" with Phil Twyford. If you look at the Chris carter page you will see what I have succeeded in doing. Would you be able to correct it? Thanks very much.Rick570 (talk) 08:22, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Sure, no trouble. The parameters were simply in the wrong order. Sorry, didn't spot this earlier when I mended the year range issue. Schwede66 08:28, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much.Rick570 (talk) 09:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK

Hey,

I understand it's just a suggestion to get me involved in the team work of reviewing articles, however currently I don't really have time for that and won't have until after 3 weeks at least. Mohamed CJ (talk) 20:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I suggest we keep the discussion in one place. Please post at Template:Did you know nominations/Prisons in Bahrain. Schwede66 21:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

NZ Politicians

Thank you for your work on NZ politicians. I am currently editing some NZ politicians articles for: unnecessary burial details (eg. like so & so died & was buried "one day", "two days", "three days later"-a previous editor has a fixation (or perversion?) about how many days people were buried after they died!); also editing to modern English (20th or 21st Century) from a 19th Century Jane Austen or Bronte Sisters writing style!; and removing any irrelevant biographical material through previous poor editing (or flagrant cut & paste by a prior editor!). The Bible for this editing seems to be the NZ Encyclopedia of 1906. The offending editor is an expert at copying great screeds of material from this publication verbatium! Any help on this vast editing & correcting project would be very much appreciated! Cheers, Otakaro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Otakaro (talk • contribs) 19:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Please note that The Cyclopedia of New Zealand is vanity press (many details are incorrect and contributions often portray individuals in a rather biased fashion), but the content can be used verbatim, as it's available under a Creative Commons licence (which is not to say that the English shouldn't be updated). As long as that licensing status is referred to in the references section, there is nothing wrong with using the text. When you edit contributions, make sure that you do not delete references, as they may verify more than just a burial detail. Thanks for your help! Schwede66 19:33, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up Schwede 66. Yes, the language used in these NZ politician articles is very antiquated! Apology for the reference removal. Will keep you updated on progress...Otakaro — Preceding unsigned comment added by Otakaro (talk • contribs) 19:50, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK Michael Roach (soccer)

Michael Roach (soccer) has been expanded (I believe) beyond the 1,500 character mark. I copy-pasted into MA Word and used that to check, but I don't know if there's an official WikiWay to decide that. Any assistance you could offer would be helpful. Cheers! Achowat (talk) 17:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Schwede66. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Nad's.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Till I Go Home ^{talk edits} 03:57, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Mayors of W[h]anganui category

Note: I'm just going to put this category issue through the ringer of process so it can settle somewhere. Feel free to comment. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I have left a comment there. Schwede66 21:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament, Christchurch

Hi Schwede66, Has the decision on restoration or demolition of the Christchurch Catholic Cathedral been made yet? If it has not been made, I think the Cathedral should not be in the category of ex-churches and should be taken out, at least for the moment. Kind regards, Rick570 (talk) 01:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

No formal decision has been announced yet. It looks and feels like a 'former church', but for now, I have removed that category again. Schwede66 01:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Schwede66. I think the RCs will be very reluctant to demolish it, mostly because of the enormous sacrifices so many, mainly poor, Canterbury families made to build it 100 years ago. There is very strong emotional attachment by the community to the building. Also it is a particularly fine and original building for architectural reaons. It will be interesting to see what happens. Thanks a lot.Rick570 (talk) 02:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

John Brian Burke

Moved discussion by User:Aardean on John Brian Burke to the article talk page, as that's where it belongs. Schwede66 20:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

• Investigative report: Is the requests for adminship process 'broken'?

• News and notes: Ground shifts while chapters dither over new Association

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations

• WikiProject report: The Punks of Wikipedia

• Featured content: Taken with a pinch of "salt"

• Arbitration report: Three open cases, GoodDay case closed

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:25, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

• Op-ed: A call for editorial input in developing new Creative Commons licensing

• News and notes: "Mystical" Picture of the Year; run-up to Wikimania DC; RfA reform 2012

• In the news: Wales enters extradition battle; Wikipedia's political bias

• Recent research: Edit war patterns, deleters vs. the 1%, never used cleanup tags, authorship inequality, higher quality from central users, and mapping the wikimediasphere

• WikiProject report: Summer Sports Series: WikiProject Athletics

• Featured content: A good week for the Williams

• Arbitration report: Three open cases

• Technology report: Second Visual Editor prototype launches

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 07:21, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

• Analysis: Uncovering scientific plagiarism

• Op-ed: Representing knowledge – metadata, data and linked data

• News and notes: RfC on joining lobby group; JSTOR accounts for Wikipedians and the article feedback tool

• In the news: Public relations on Wikipedia: friend or foe?

• Discussion report: Discussion reports and miscellaneous articulations

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: Burning rubber with WikiProject Motorsport

• Featured content: Heads up

• Arbitration report: Three open cases, motion for the removal of Carnildo's administrative tools

• Technology report: Initialisms abound: QA and HTML5

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 12:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Peter Finn

Hi. I agree that the 'not-run' issue is no longer so extraneous in the present footnote context. I was earlier concerned that the emphasis seemed to have shifted away from the subject of Finn to that of elections in which he was not involved. E.g., would you now follow it by footnoting all the Victorian elections before his death, as evidence that he also no longer had political ambitions in Australia? :) Btw, in creating your three redlinks, is it your intention to provide those articles in the near future, or are you floating them as a proposed task for others? Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 01:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Bjenks, great to see that we agree. I don't know where to look for Australian sources for elections, so no, I'm not planning on looking up Australian elections. But if somebody else did that who has the sources at hand and it is relevant to his character / life / bio, then I'd appreciate it. With regards to redlinks, when creating articles, I generally redlink everything where I'm 100% certain of its notability. You will find that I take great care of making sure that I'm not inventing an article name, but look for other redlinks where those exist (the 1871 election redlink comes from an election template and the two electorate redlinks come from a list article). I have no intentions of creating those articles myself (lack of sources, and there's enough to do on this this side of the ditch), but I also don't expect anybody else to create them. That said, they will turn blue over time. My observation is that the Australian politics wikiproject has still a surprisingly large number of redlinks. Another observation is that many of your articles are completely unreferenced. Lots to do, eh? We have a couple of Kiwis who might help with creating stub articles for missing politicians / electorates / elections. One of them codes by hand and the other one uses database processes. If you have an interest in that, I could put you in touch. If, for example, one of you guys could set up a list of all members of your lower house, say, the guy running the database processes could probably get a stub created from your Victorian parliament bio database (shouldn't be too hard for him; he just needs a list of redlinks as a starting point). Schwede66 01:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Uh, huh, no probs. I looked about and noted that WP is very thin on Vic elections, but the verifiability has to be there somewhere in their huge state library! Being in Perth, I'm almost as far away as you are, so will remain just an interested observer! Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 02:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Legislative Council

Have made Suicide squad (New Zealand) into an article, and the List of MLCs should be made an article now too. Hugo999 (talk) 10:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

• Special report: Reforming the education programs: lessons from Cairo

• News and notes: Russian Wikipedia blackout; WMF tools; Wikitravel proposal revisited

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Football

• Featured content: Keeps on chuggin'

• Arbitration report: Three requests for arbitration

• Technology report: Optimism over LastModified and MoodBar, but change in clock time causes downtime

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 12:02, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Arthur Rhodes (politician)

I've slightly amended your 'hook', it now says " ...New Zealand House of Representatives", which will hopefully make more immediate sense to readers who aren't familiar with NZ politics. Hope you are okay with that. Everything else looks good-to-go! Sionk (talk) 18:50, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

• Special report: Chapters Association mired in controversy over new chair

• News and notes: WMF enacts reforms at Wikimania; main page redesign; 4 millionth article milestone

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: French WikiProject Cycling

• Discussion report: Discussion reports and miscellaneous articulations

• Wikimania: Young chapter shows experience beyond its years

• Featured content: Taking flight

• Technology report: Tech talks at Wikimania amid news of a mixed June

• Arbitration report: Fæ faces site-ban, proposed decisions posted

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 12:28, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2012

• Paid editing: Does Wikipedia pay? The skeptic: Orange Mike

• From the editor: Signpost developments

• News and notes: Chapter head speaks about the aftermath of Russian Wikipedia shutdown

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Olympics

• Arbitration report: Fæ and Michaeldsuarez banned; Kwamikagami desysopped; Falun Gong closes with mandated external reviews and topic bans

• Op-ed: The future of PR on Wikipedia

• Featured content: When is an island not an island?

• Technology report: Translating SVGs and making history bugs history

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

• Recent research: Conflict dynamics, collaboration and emotions; digitization vs. copyright; WikiProject field notes; quality of medical articles; role of readers; Best Wiki Paper Award

• News and notes: Wikimedians and London 2012; WMF budget – staffing, engineering, editor retention effort, and the global South; Telegraph's cheap shot at WP

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Horse Racing

• Featured content: One of a kind

• Technology report: Talking performance with CT Woo and Green Semantic MediaWiki with Nischay Nahata

• Arbitration report: No pending or open arbitration cases

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 12:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

• Op-ed: The Athena Project: being bold

• News and notes: FDC portal launched

• Arbitration report: No pending or open arbitration cases

• Featured content: Casliber's words take root

• Technology report: Wikidata nears first deployment but wikis go down in fibre cut calamity

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Martial Arts

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 10:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks Schwedde66. Almost everything I write is referenced, so I should know how to do it properly.Rick570 (talk) 21:29, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Henry Brown (New Zealand politician)

Hello! Your submission of Henry Brown (New Zealand politician) 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! Daniel Case (talk) 04:38, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Saw your reply On DYK Talk Page

Hey May I know when do I have the privilege to actually review papers? Since I am newish, I often think that I dont hold any authority whatsoever. What exactly do I have the right to do around here? Khyati Gupta (talk) 19:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Anybody has the right to review anything at DYK at any stage. Some reviews are even done by anons (i.e. users that are either not logged in, or don't have an account). What you do is to read the reviewing guide, then pick something that you'd like to review, work your way through the requirements and then write down what you have found. I'd suggest that you spell out that it's your first review and that you'd like somebody else to have another look whether you got it right. You could also ping me again and I'd be happy to check things over. How's that? Schwede66 19:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Cool! What else can I do around here? Khyati Gupta (talk) 19:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

What are you interested in? Any specific topic, or are you asking about helping at DYK? Schwede66 19:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Well I made few edits here and I tried contributing 2 new pages. Am aware of certain rules an regulations about neutrality of articles. After all the experiences encountered, what privileges does it give me here on wikipedia? Do you have to geek out really hard to be an administrator here? Khyati Gupta (talk) 22:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

It's a long, hard slog to become an administrator. Those are elected positions and you will have to have been around for a long time, with a lot of edits under your belt, and most importantly, have earned the respect of a lot of fellow editors before you will get anywhere near that one. There's a lot of cool stuff that you can do prior to becoming an admin. On the DYK front, more experienced editors put the prep sets together; you don't have to be an admin to do that. You'll get the necessary experience by doing lots of reviews :) Schwede66 23:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey by the way, I contributed to one of the DYK. Please do see if my review was decent: Template:Did_you_know_nominations/2012_Indian_Premier_League_spot_fixing_case Khyati Gupta (talk) 23:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I have also commented, so that you can see what else matters. Schwede66 23:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I added Stuff too! Whats a copyedit? :D Khyati Gupta (talk) 23:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Have a read up on copyediting; basically, it's improving grammar, language, style, and bringing articles in line with Wikipedia's Manual of Style (MoS). Great contributions from you on the review template. Just note that when you start contributing to the article beyond some minor tweaks, you will not be able to contribute to the review any longer. But if your contributions become significant enough, you can be added to the contributors for the article, and when the DYK credit comes out, you'll receive one, too. Keep up the good work! Schwede66 23:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I added more recommendations to the spot fixing article. Please see if it is on the right track. Thankies :) Khyati Gupta (talk) 22:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

You will have seen that I have further commented on the nomination. DYK is a complex process and the basic question is whether an article meets the requirements or not. Beyond that, almost any article can certainly be improved further. When we first started reviewing the article, it was a stub and they are not eligible. Once it got expanded beyond being a stub, that requirement was met and any further expansion is no longer an issue that DYK concerns itself with. Rule D7 gives a good example of what matters. You have to decide for yourself whether you want to stay on the reviewing side of the DYK process, or start expanding articles that interest you (at which point, you can't review them any longer, but you might well get the DYK credit as a result). But you can't require an editor to expand their article when it's already long enough. Schwede66 19:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

It is a complex process :( So I want to get one thing cleared. The person who makes any changes to the article cannot approve the DYK. DYK is approved only by people who are only watching over the article and cannot get involved with editing it? Khyati Gupta (talk) 02:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

If your changes are minor, you can still be involved in the DYK process (everything that I've done to the article is minor, by my reckoning). But when you start contributing content, that's not a minor change and then you'd have to retire from the DYK process, as you would have a conflict of interest. Schwede66 06:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Ahhh I see! Thanks! I have learned so much about conflict of interest in my campus lectures! Khyati Gupta (talk) 06:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Dude, Im a female ._. Khyati Gupta (talk) 06:03, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

My name is pronounced as Kathy. Ill add that bit to my userpage too, now. :D Khyati Gupta (talk) 06:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I learn something every day, and here, I've just learned two things. I hope you'll forgive me. Schwede66 06:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh no! I wasn't mad! :D I wasn't mad at all! :D I just wanted to make sure. Im sorry if it came out the wrong way. Khyati Gupta (talk) 06:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

For your insightful response and followup to the "This one has been up" question. Orlady (talk) 22:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Yum - thanks! I really love strawberries. Schwede66 23:22, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for cognitive vulnerability

Greetings. I was wondering if you can check out this article. I created this article. And I sat down hours and hours and understood the material and then wrote it in my own words. However, one of the users have stamped that I copied stuff. Which is unfair. Here is the article. I have fixed the citations which could ease some misunderstanding. I dont believe there is any issue with Copyedit. I would appreciate if you can check it out. Thanks.Khyati Gupta (talk) 01:16, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a look tomorrow. My WP time for today has been used up. If I forget, please remind me. Schwede66 06:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Will do! Thank you! Khyati Gupta (talk) 06:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I got rid of the OCD part. Please check the nomination page. Thank you. Khyati Gupta (talk) 21:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

By the way, "Revision Demanded" is not language that I would use. It would sound much nicer if you said something along the lines: "The article is ready for another review, as I think that I have attended to all the issues raised by the reviewer." Schwede66 05:49, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Will do. Thank you.Khyati Gupta (talk) 05:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

2 DYK noms

I've given Later life of José de San Martín the old college try; letting you know here as well as with the red bendy arrow at the nomination, since there is some urgency. Also, I owe a good solid look at Cognitive vulnerability, since I was able to find the main source on GoogleBooks. But that has been waiting for me to have a long enough stretch of uninterrupted time; work required me to do too much actual work this week. So, letting you know I hope to get to that in a few hours, and hopefully I can reduce the remaining work needed to get it through DYK. --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Letting you as well as the article creator know that I have given Cognitive vulnerability a once-over. Some of what I've done may illustrate my ignorance of the topic, but I'm hoping some will help move it away from the appearance of overly close paraphrasing and also make it clearer to the non-expert, and that re-changing what I got wrong will lead to further improvement. But I must now go to bed before I make any more silly mistakes :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:51, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I've written out an alternate hook for Later life of José de San Martín. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:25, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

• Op-ed: Small Wikipedias' burden

• News and notes: Bangla-language survey suggests the challenges for small Wikipedias

• Arbitration report: You really can request for arbitration

• Featured content: On the road again

• Technology report: "Phabricating" a serious alternative to Gerrit

• WikiProject report: Dispute Resolution

• Discussion report: Image placeholders, machine translations, Mediation Committee, de-adminship

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Did you know nominations/Collier Bay (horse) & Danoli

Hey! I gave a check mark to this article long pending to be approved. I checked out the citation for the hook and thought it was relevant. The hook seemed interesting and the article was overall neutral. So I was wondering if I did the right thing by approving it. Please see. Thanks. Khyati Gupta (talk) 04:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll see whether I can find some time tomorrow morning. Schwede66 05:50, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for William Ott

Yngvadottir (talk) 00:03, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey. This nomination is approved. I made some suggestions. It seems as if my suggestions were faulty. I was only trying to make sense of what was written and was looking at the copy-editing article you sent me and was making suggestions. :( If you can glance it, I would appreciate it. Thanks : ) Khyati Gupta (talk) 23:00, 18 August 2012 (UTC)