Jump to content

User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Dabomb87

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by PearBOT II (talk | contribs) at 03:16, 16 December 2023 (→top: Merge Template:Archive and Template:Archive navigation per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 December 7#Template:Archive). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15

Master of Orion II GA review

Hi, Dabomb87, thanks for closing this (as a pass). I've left a message at the original reviewer's Talk page. --Philcha (talk) 18:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Rumford Prize

Can you explain your oppose a little? I'm going on vacation, doubtful I can access the Internet; I've asked Ceranthor to finish the FLC, if he accepts can you please send him the same PDFs you send me? Thank you.ResMar 19:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll accept here, for convenience sake. ceranthor 19:49, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Okey dokey, I've resolved all the non-content concerns, could you send me the e-mail, too? ceranthor 20:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, I'll send you a Wikipedia email first. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

4 Minutes

Hey Dabomb, I withdrew nomination of 4 minutes and applied for a PR. Well can you give your inputs there regarding what more can be improved? --Legolas (talk2me) 09:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops!

Thanks for transluding that one. I completely forgot! :) iMatthew talk at  22:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Incentive system for reviewers, again

For WT:FAR. To be frank, I think there is 0% chance that the average detail of reviews will decrease. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Probably busy, but...

...do you have anything else for the FLCs for Pritzker Prize and/or Mercury Prize? Both reviews have somewhat stalled. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to work my way up the FLC list. I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
No problemo. Have a good weekend, don't "work" too hard! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Pritzker (besides the redirects which are fine) done. Thanks for your quick review. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:45, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Done your pesky redirects dude! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Done your peskier repeated refs duderino! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Alright, supporting. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Too kind! Enjoy your weekend. Get on the Mercury comments when you get a few moments! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver

 Done –Juliancolton | Talk 01:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Eh, I doubt that day will ever come. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 04:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Akureyri

See User:User F203/sandbox/Iceland for explanation and checklist.

The article is much improved. I have avoided adding fluff to make the article longer as is the case with some articles, yet the article is 80% of the recommended maximum for some browsers (26kb now versus 32 kb limit for some browsers). All the sections found in other GA city articles are covered. It would be nice of you if you can confirm the GA status because there would still be time to do last minute corrections during the weekend. Thank you. User F203 (talk) 16:22, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

OK. I'll take a look this afternoon. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, for a small town, you'll have to admit that there's a lot written in the article! User F203 (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
"This afternoon" was yesterday. Did you have a look at it? If it passes your review, then I will enjoy the weekend and slowly improve it. If not, I will make the final push this weekend and work on it like there is no tomorrow. See the top link (sandbox) for an analysis. Thank you. User F203 (talk) 14:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Since you did not reply, I'm going to take the weekend off. I was hoping that if it did not pass but was almost there that I could make the final push this weekend. By not replying, I can't make the final revisions to meet the July 5 deadline. So could you either pass it, say the article is complete rubbish, or let me know that it's almost there. User F203 (talk) 16:08, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. Based on what you wrote, I think the article is almost GA for a small town and that a weekend's work can fix it. Your understanding is appreciated and will not go unrewarded. Furthermore, I'll even remind you myself that the deadline is over once I work on it another weekend (this weekend, I'm away from the computer most of the time).

Some of the things that need sources actually do have sources but the source covered much of the paragraph. For example. Sentence 1. Sentence 2. Sentence 3. Reference number. The reference covered sentence 1,2, and 3. I didn't add any facts from my personal knowledge. In fact, I kept some personal knowledge out of the article to avoid OR.

Will write back to you soon after I get a chance to do the final revisions! Of course, minor revisions will be done for months to come as our work is never done! User F203 (talk) 20:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Discography FLCs

Regarding your comment at the albums project, These aren't strictly under the scope of this project, but if someone could take a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Dream Theater discography/archive2 and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Devin Townsend discography/archive2, that would be great. While discogs are of interest to most members of the albums project, there is a project specifically related to them: WP:DISCOGRAPHY. -Freekee (talk) 05:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I know, I posted there, but in the past, there are times when we still haven't gotten eyes even when I posted there. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Okay. No problem, just trying to help out. It's tough getting help on tasks like that. Everyone seems to have their own areas of interest. -Freekee (talk) 16:24, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

RE

Ok. I think that you are right. I can nominate for the featured list the List of awards and nominations received by 30 Seconds to Mars? It is a great page. What do you think?--Matthew Riva (talk) 09:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Does this mean you want to withdraw the discography FLC? Dabomb87 (talk) 14:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Now I am improving the page.--Matthew Riva (talk) 14:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

see barnstar page 17:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Not often I disagee with you...

...but I've just declined a speedy for Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of skin-related conditions/archive1. Over 200 pages (mostly talk) link to it, which actually brings up slight canvassing concerns. At the moment, seeing as the FLC is an current active nomination I think that, at least until the nom is finished, keeping the redirect is practical and convenient for some users. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:37, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, did not notice those. Mind if I retag it after the FLC concludes? Dabomb87 (talk) 20:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
No, be my guest. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

A query

Thanks for commenting on the Ruff FAC. I just wanted to ask about the origins of the which/that guidelines. I've never come across this particular rule before, either in my dozen or so previous FACs or elsewhere, and I'm old enough to have attended a UK school that taught that sort of stuff, and I don't remember it.

Now, this isn't a complaint, your Google search link made it clear you are correct, and I accept that. I just wondered how it had slipped under my radar. Is it a relatively recent formalisation, or something that's primarily American (I note MS Word's grammar check has a tendency to query which on every conceivable occasion), or is it just something I've totally missed in the decades since I left school? As I say, this isn't a whinge, I'm just curious. You may well not know the answer, so I don't necessarily expect a reply, thanks jimfbleak (talk) 10:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I have noticed that it seems to be a British tendency to use "which" instead of "that", but I've seen and heard Americans use them interchangeably too. In informal English (especially spoken), many use either which in lieu of that regardless of circumstance, and it is considered acceptable to do so in most instances. In more formal encyclopedic prose though, I think the grammatical precision is necessary. I hope someone who has more knowledge in this area can help me out here. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
The Chicago Manual of Style puts it very well, and is a lesson for all English-speakers. It goes something like this: because "that" and "which" can both be used without comma to indicate a subset rather than the whole, but ", which" indicates only the whole, it's good to avoid any sense that the writer might have got it wrong, which is common enough. "The funding that will enable construction" (a specific subset of funding) leaves no doubt that the writer might have meant "The funding, which will enable construction" (all of the funding). If you write "The funding which will enable construction", the comma might just have inadvertently left out, which could be disastrous. The optional "which" is thought to be elegant by some English-speakers (including David Attenbrough), but I got over that long ago, emboldened by the plain English movement, which started in the 70s. Tony (talk) 16:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you for the detailed replies. I'm sure you are right about the usage being less formalised in BE, which at least partially explains my former ignorance. jimfbleak (talk) 18:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Essex FLC

Thanks. The only reason I asked TRM, as the bot had run and there was no FLC promotions, so I got a little worried.Mitch/HC32 16:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Article prose size

I was interested in the comparison of article prose sizes, as compared to overall size, for the various FAs on cities. How does one calculate that? Sunray (talk) 08:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Dr pda/prosesize.js. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, much. Sunray (talk) 07:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

List of cardinal-nephews

Hey dude. Reviewing this list and can't get my head round why the table cols change width from 13th to 17th Century tables. The nominator is setting every col of every table to 200 but those tables in the middle of the list are clearly not equally spaced out. Any ideas? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Question about a list

I am considering creating a couple of new list articles. The first one is regarding the aireal victories of Eddie Rickenbacker, there are 26 for WWI but I am not sure if this would be enough to warrant a list, any suggestions? The other involves the Medal of Honor recipients (bix surprise huh, lol). I am thinking about creating a couple of new lists, 1 for Buarials at Arlington Cemetery (there are about 340+ recipents buried there) and in regards to the American Civil War lists, I have continued to struggle with how to deal with these from the standpoint of getting featured and I think I am going to breakthem up by Battle, about half can be easily aligned to a battle (Gettysburg, Chancleorsville, Frederickburg, Spotsycourthouse, etc) and I was wondering if that would be appropriate? Thanks for the help. --Kumioko (talk) 20:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Since you guys are checking copyright problems for FLs, I am just wondering if there are NBA featured lists that have copyright problems.—Chris! ct 00:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I only checked for obvious copyright problems (e.g. many instances of close paraphrasing and excessive usage of quotation of copyrighted info). There may be individual sentences or phrases that could be rephrased in the NBA lists, but I saw nothing blatant. Since many of those lists are mostly statistics or lists of entities, you needn't worry much. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, also for catching my mistake :)—Chris! ct 00:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Could you help copyedit 2009 NBA All-Star Game when you have time? I've appreciated it. Thanks—Chris! ct 01:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Well you asked for it........

Some comments - got the feeling you had an easy run from the other reviewers! Wouldn't want you to feel cheated! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for. I'll get on it. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Akeuryri, semi-finished for now

Thank you for your flexibility. I have addressed all of your concerns. If it can remain a GA, let me know. If there are small issues that prevent it from being GA, then I'd like to use that weekend gift (allowance to work on it this weekend) that you granted. If it is hopeless, then you can declare it BA (bad article). Please note that even if you let the article remain GA, I will continue to improve it slowly.

Please also consider that it is a small town with little written about it. The WP article could be the most comprehensive resource for Akureyri on the internet now! User F203 (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there is such thing as a "bad article"; some articles are just better than others. I can give you the weekend. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Your reply is unclear. If it can retain the GA in it's present form, let me know. I've complied with all of the suggestions. The weekend allowance is just to do some more corrections and look for more references to expand the article. In other words, I'd like your re-evaluation now. If it fails but is almost there, then the few extra days will help to salvage it. If it passes now, then that's a relief but will not mean that I will stop editing. Thank you. User F203 (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Runcorn lists

Just to say thanks for your positive comments here. It all got off to a bad start with the comment about combining lists, which would IMO not be a good idea, for geographical, historical and cultural reasons - surely these are more important than the mere numbers of items in a list. The whole nomination seemed to have got stuck up a blind alley, so I hope your involvement will move things on a bit. Cheers. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I personally like the lists separate too. FLC has gone in a funk recently about content forking and "short lists" because in the past editors could pass ten-item musician's awards lists (which could have easily been integrated into the main article) through FLC and call them our "best work". However, your buildings list does not qualify as such, and, as you said, numbers aren't everything; there are other things to be considered in stand-alone lists, such as those you mentioned above. Keep up the good work on the lists and good luck on whatever topic plans you may have. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:17, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
That's fine by me. Sorry about the gender thing - I should have looked at your user boxes. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Illinois Athletic Club

I think an article could survive WP:AFD, but do not expect an article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:17, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Super Bowl of Poker

DaBomb could you take a look at this article. I want to nom it for FL, but I don't want you to lambast me again for noming an article that needs alot of help. Engrish grammer hath alweys me problim b.  ;-) (The problem with learning to spell phonetically when you had a childhood speech impediment.)---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 03:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

You are invited to participate in an interesting discussion at Wikipedia talk:Image use policy#File:Man Utd FC .svg. Your comments & suggestions are very much appreciated Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 08:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

+

see barnstar page 06:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Lake Burley Griffin YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 16:03, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Working on it. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

List of Medal of Honor recipients for World War I

I finished fixing the items you identified as well as some other things. I am going create some articles to get rid of some of the red links and I will continue to review the notes. Please take a look at your leisure and let me know if I missed anything.--Kumioko (talk) 21:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

When moving pages...

When you move pages, please update the links that you've now changed. And I'm not sure if a page move really qualifies as a "minor" edit. Hooperswim (talk) 03:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

By the way, is having a "–" in lieu of "--" in the Wikipedia MOS somewhere? The double hyphens are easier to type than the spaces and em-dash (or is it an en-dash?) Hooperswim (talk) 03:58, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about not changing the links. I think moves are automatically marked as minor; do you know how to fix that? It's not explicit, but per WP:MOSDASH, listed or separated items are separated by spaced en dashes. See for example, the Olympic pages in Category:Table tennis events at the 2008 Summer Olympics. As for keying in dashes, yes it's a pain, but you can key them in with this code: &ndash; Dabomb87 (talk) 16:26, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
No, not sure how to not mark a move as minor. I will try to see if I notice something the next move I do (but given that I don't tend to move pages too often, that might not be anytime soon). Hooperswim (talk) 03:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
They are automatically marked minor. See this discussion. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Rather randomly, I ended up moving a page today, and did not see an option to not mark it as "minor". I guess the PTB are still waiting on the software changes? Hooperswim (talk) 15:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I suppose so. I can understand both sides of the discussion; i.e., mass moving would flood Special:RecentChanges, but moves are certainly not "minor". Dabomb87 (talk) 15:54, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for updating cent

Thank you for updating {{Cent}} after the RFC closed. I just realized I had forgotten about it, but you had already taken care of it. Same for all the other things you took care of related to my proposal. --Apoc2400 (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Do you think we should notify the Village Pump, the usual noticeboards, add a watchlist notice, etc.? Dabomb87 (talk) 17:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for dealing with comments on the FLC. I was kind of busy and don't have time to deal with it. BTW, can you help me save List of San Jose Sharks players? I tried to but would need some more helps to fix all comments. If you can't, that's ok. I think you have already done a fantastic job keeping FLC running smoothly.—Chris! ct 17:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Alt text

Thanks, I may have to rethink putting an image column on the lists. I left a comment at the link you left. --Kumioko (talk) 02:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. I see you are now opposing based on the lack of alt text. The criteria state " "alt" text if necessary" - it seems that you are now suggesting "alt text for every image" should be the wording. I can't see how I can add alt text to the head-shots of people. Their names are next to the images, the alt text would be "a picture of name..." - is that what we really want? I think we're going to delist a HUGE number of articles if this is how we're going to interpret that criterion. Perhaps you could collate another list of lists to be demoted for lack of alt text, as you did with the copyright quotation list? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

:And also interestingly, the first example given on our own page for alt text is the flag of France with alt text of "National flag of France". So, for instance, in the Mercury Prize list, we have "Inaugural winners Primal Scream" under a picture of Primal Scream. This seems very similar to the example at WP:ALT. What do you suggest? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

My apologies. A bad start to Friday indeed. However, the first paragraph is pretty much okay still. If you want to mandate alt text, we need to look at all our FLs, agreed? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about the alt text thing. The thing is that we're close to closures, and I have no other way to catch people's attention. I'll revisit each one individually today. Sorry for the rough greeting. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
No worries. The bad start was really the fact I didn't do my homework before getting a little too irritable for my own good. I think all my current FLCs have now got alt text where I think it's required. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm just glad this impulse of mind came on a Friday and not on a Monday :) Dabomb87 (talk) 12:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, would have been a very very bad start to the week...! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to let you know that I left the below comment on the alt text discussion. After giving this a fiar bit of though I think this would be the best way to make this work.

Recommendation: I would like to recommend that as we implement this we start with the image itself. If we create a standard alt text for an image then a bot, AWB or even a human can ensure that the alt text is 1)associated with the picture and 2)is consistent from article to article for that picture. I admit that it may require a modification to the way that comments are associated to images however I think this is the easiest way that allows us to present a clean and consistent alt text to the readers and editors while at the same time minimizing the manual editing required. If we can come up with a standard wau to document the alt text for an image it shoudl be relatively easy to create a script or bot to populate said image with alt text. See File:Moh right.gif as an example. --Kumioko (talk) 18:45, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Done

Thanks; too used to SPI's and CHU's, I guess :/. Thanks again! -- Avi (talk) 23:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem. Good luck with the FAC. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:50, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame/archive1

Hi, you commented on this FLC a few days ago, and I believe that I have addressed all of your concerns. The FLC is on its tenth day, so it is eligible to be closed soon. If you could stop by when you have a chance, I would really appreciate it. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 20:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello again. I hope I'm not getting annoying, but I responded to your concerns six days ago. If there is anything else that you feel needs to be fixed, I would really appreciate knowing so that I can get to work on it while the FLC is still open. Thanks again, GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Akureyri

I was hoping and did ask you for some guidance a few days ago so I could make final weekend fixes. However, you must be busy and did not respond. Therefore, I will leave Akureyri alone for now and leave it subject to your axe.

Hopefully, you will not axe it too badly and let it remain a GA. On the GA assessment, I have done everything that is required and marked it with a  Done. User F203 (talk) 21:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Akureyri/1. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:49, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I can live with that. Your summary is not harsh or bitey at all. Rather identifies it as a small town and asks others for guidance. Best of luck in WP and until we meet again by chance! User F203 (talk) 17:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Black Hawk War

I stumbled across this while working on my latest USMA list and it's in pretty good shape. I've started fixing it up and listed it at Good Article Noms. Any help would be appreciated. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Question

Do you think list of cutaneous conditions could be a viable candidate for feature on the main page? ---kilbad (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, lists cannot be featured on the main page. See User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day for a failed proposal to that end. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks lol

Thanks for that haha, I must be on something xP--Truco 503 01:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Stuart Woods

heh, you're stalking me! :p

What's up with "…"? I added changed it from "..." because at first I couldn't remember how to type it properly, until I noticed it in the markup section below the edit window. Shouldn't it be used? Matthewedwards :  Chat  20:57, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I just used Advisor.js to fix it. According to MOS: "Pre-composed ellipsis character (…); generated with the … character entity, or as a literal "…". This is harder to input and edit, and too small in some fonts. Not recommended." Dabomb87 (talk) 22:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah yes, I'd forgotten about WP:ELLIPSIS. I wonder why, then, we include the "…" character in our "Insert" markup. The guideline also answered my next question; should spaces go before it.
BTW, what do you think of Stuart Woods so far. I've only gotten as far as the paragraph ending in "Mystery Writers of America", and I haven't written a Lede yet. He's my favourite author, I have most of his books, except his first two which I need to re-borrow from the library. It appears from the article history that the subject copy/pasted the biography from his own website, and I'm trying to make it more Wikipedia-ish than a self-serving advert type thing.
Should I consider writing his sailing endeavours as something similar to Commander Bill King, describing in some detail each race, or should I leave that bit and focus more on his career as a novellist? Any suggestions you have would be good. Regards, Matthewedwards :  Chat  05:34, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
It's a nice start. Still need sources in a couple areas—I added fact tags. Was there any critism of his writing? Here's a weird sentence: "Woods, King, and their third crewmember, Shirley Clifford,[17] left from Portsmouth, England to The Azores in August 1975.[18]85-98)". If you ever plan to take the article to a high level (GA, FA), be sure not to become too reliant on his autobiography. Did Woods not marry? Where is he based now? What are his plans? Just some things to think about. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the author, but the weight given to his sailing and his writing seems fine. One thing, if you can address it, is that it seems as if those two parts of his life were independent of each other, although they are somewhat related (his second novel was to be about the Round Britain Yacht Race, etc.). If there is any way you could integrate the two more, so that it reads more narratively instead of topically, that would be great. Otherwise, nice job. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Wimbledon Alt text

Hello ! You asked for alt text to be added on the List of Wimbledon Gentlemen's Singles champions review page, and I just wanted to ask you a question about that : Should the alt text be entirely descriptive, or can I name the players ? That is, should I write alt texts like : "Pete Sampras looks at his opponent as he prepares to serve" or "A portrait of Reginald and Lawrence Doherty show the two brothers sitting on the floor in tennis outfits, looking at the camera" ? --Don Lope (talk) 16:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

FL(R)C

Sorry, I hadn't seen that you'd suggested it the other way round in a comment above. It read funny to me but I am in little doubt that you are correct because English is really not my forte. On a different matter do you have any ideas of what to do with this, as it is all rather stagnant and I would like to get things wrapped up (if possible) before I go away in just over a week. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Date delinking

Heh...interesting that you should point that out, since I did follow parts of that discussion, and I'm usually pretty careful about DElinking dates. Has there been a consensus yet regarding the use of templates like {{by}} in article text, and is that the linking to which you are referring? Or is there something else that I'm doing that I'm missing? -Dewelar (talk) 00:39, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

What happened is that the filter, for whatever reason, caught this edit. You didn't do anything wrong, although you did link "debutdate" and "finaldate" in the infobox (don't think they need to be linked). Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah, OK. Yeah, I usually copy and paste those infoboxes, and use the existing format. If the dates are supposed to be delinked in there, I can try and remember to remove them next time. Thanks! -Dewelar (talk) 01:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Public Account

Hi. I just wanted to confirm that you've set up a public account at User:Dabomb87Public. It popped up at WP:UAA and I just wanted to make sure it was you. Thanks! TNXMan 00:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's me. Thanks for your vigilance. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
For transparency's sake, I only intend to use it for when I don't have access to the computer for a while (e.g. I'll be out of country for a while later this year and my only computer access will be through cybercafes). Dabomb87 (talk) 00:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
No problem. I'll need the same thing in a few months! TNXMan 01:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

MoS

This is wrong. Per MoS: "For example, in Outline of Africa, the first sentence of the lead should describe Africa, and present it in bold - not Outline of Africa (the article is not about outlines of Africa, it is presenting an article on Africa in outline form)." Africa is bolded as Christopher Smart should be. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, per WP:BOLDTITLE, links should not be bolded, and bold should only be used if it is a verbatim repetition of the title of the article. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I just quoted where it says right there Africa and not Outline of Africa, is bolded. That is not "verbatim repetition of the title". Then it says "Use as few links as possible before and in the bolded title." Not "don't use any links". You seem not to understand what it says, and if you persist I will take it up at AN. The English is 100% clear. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, I won't revert you; I'm restricted by ArbCom ;) Take it up with Sandy or Tony if you like. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
P.S. Using no links seems to be compliant with "as few as possible". Dabomb87 (talk) 15:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I've worked with Sandy and have shared FAs with her. Trust me, I know the MoS. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

RfC

I have closed the RfC you co-proposed. Please see Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Role_of_Jimmy_Wales_in_the_English_Wikipedia#Notes and the subsequent section. I am sorry to say that I did not find consensus for the proposals. Please review my closure and let me know if you think I have made any errors, either in interpratation or administration. --Dweller (talk) 17:48, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Cheers Dweller, that summarizes my views on the consensus too. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Michael P. Murphy

Good day to you Dabomb. I am having a problem with this article. I cannot seem to get the table with the ribbons to come out right could you please assist? --Kumioko (talk) 19:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I assume you're referring to this. What's wrong? Everything looks fine to me. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
The Medal of Honor, Silver star and purple heart in the table shoudl be centered (without the last empty cell) as they are in the Chesty Puller article. I must be missing something because I just cannot seem to get the table to work correctly. --Kumioko (talk) 20:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
If you are referring to the table with the actual names of the medals, I think you need to add colspans. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Your right and I tried that but I can't seem to get it right. Would you mind taking a look? --Kumioko (talk) 20:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Fixed. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I see what I did wrong now. I was only adding the colspan to the row not the entire table. --Kumioko (talk) 21:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Featured article review

Thanks for your comments on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Military career of L. Ron Hubbard/archive1. I've resolved the issues that you identified - I'd be grateful if you could check it over and update the FAC page accordingly. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Silent Alarm FAC

Hey there. Are you any closer to giving a verdict on the article's nomination? It's been there for a while now and we're trying to get a consensus or further advice. Thanks. Rafablu88 20:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, a few people have said their pieces on the band plural/singular thing. Have a look and let me know what you make of it. Rafablu88 17:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Are you any closer to giving a verdict following your comments being resolved? No rush, but it'd be nice to get a consensus going. Plus, Laserbrain struck out his oppose. Rafablu88 21:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Master of Markup

Hey Dabomb87. Currently working on List of England national football team hat-tricks and can't get the blasted results column to sort, using either the {{sort}} or {{nts}} template. Can you help? Pretty please? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

You've got to use a hidden sortkey, like so: {{sort|##|result}}; "##" is the hidden sort key, such as 03 or 12. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:18, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I tried that, I'm sure, with this version but it still didn't work for me... Been a long week, have I missed yet another obvious thing? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Single-digit sortkeys need to be preceded with "0". Dabomb87 (talk) 16:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I bloody knew that. I've even told other people that. ARGHHHH. Cheers dude. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps

Could you please take a look and see if all your comments haev been addressed?--Kumioko (talk) 15:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 18:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

List of international cricket centuries by Sourav Ganguly‎

Thank You for your comments. I've done my best to address your concerns. Please see the nomination for more details. Abeer.ag (talk) 18:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

You're right:done. Thanks again Abeer.ag (talk) 18:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Sory for missing your alt text comment. Now added for all images except graph.Abeer.ag (talk) 18:50, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Re. Jean Hugo

I've redirected to the golfer. Deleting the page is unnecessary, because of the hat note on Jean Hugo (golfer) which directs towards the artists. Hope you don't mind. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 18:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Not at all, thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Good job! I was getting a little worried about the article...Modernist (talk) 19:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Table formatting question

Sorry to bother you with this but you seem to be the answer man lately. I am almost done refomratting the President of the united States list and I can't get the color formatting right for the party on some of them. Would you mind taking a look and see what I am doing wrong. Thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 19:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
thanks I really appreciate it. I see what I did wrong now. --Kumioko (talk) 23:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

New articles

Thanks for your help and tweaks on new article pages. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:01, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Consider it my contribution to the Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Lisa Goes to Washington

I saw your edit here and I just thought I'd tell you that I haven't actually nominated the article for GA status yet. There's still some stuff I need to fix, such as copyediting. :) Theleftorium 19:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: List of awards and nominations received by Fiona Apple

Look at the article history. User:Another Believer wrote on the edit summary that there was no discussion and consensus on merging, when I already notified him about the FLRC two weeks ago. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 22:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I see. The thing is, FLRC is not a merge discussion, so technically, delisting per 3b doesn't mean that the delisted article has to be merged, although I don't see why it couldn't be merged. You might discuss it with him/her. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm currently busying editing List of Olympic medalists in table tennis, so I will discuss with him after. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 22:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Macedonia

As far as content goes, it's normally up to the wikiproject people to detect errors. It's very easy if all the WP people are the same race, for instance, to paste an article full of racial pride soapboxing YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 04:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you do me a favour

I have one open candidacy, Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/BBC Sports Personality of the Year, mainly because it was easier than removing lots of FTC templates. I don't foresee any problems apart from one which I hopefully addressed at the top. Can you just pop in to check that there is nothing minor (and I mean minor) preventing promotion. If there is anything mildly serious, or if there is still strong opposition wrt to the issue I mentioned when I restarted the nomination, can you just withdraw it on my behalf. Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'm watching it. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Cheers. Keep up the great work while I'm away. :) Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Rollback for your public account

 Done for you. Pedro :  Chat  15:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Municipalities of Lithuania

Since the article is not just a list of municipalities of Lithuania, but also about the definition of a municipality of Lithuania, I think the name is justifiable. We have other examples such as United Nations member states, which is also a featured list. Chanheigeorge (talk) 16:10, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

List of national parks of Sweden

Sure, but I have no experience at all with writing alternative text for images (and my English is lacking). Can you provide an example for one of the images? Cheers, Theleftorium 16:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm still learning on the fly. You might ask Eubulides (talk · contribs) to write a sample alt text for you. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:53, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I will, thanks. Theleftorium 17:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Alt text

Wow, it is definitely different than I thought. I will keep an eye out for any mishaps because they are all on my watchlist, and you can check out the pitchers list when it's finished to see if I've got the hang of it. I appreciate your help! KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to ask this here but I cannot find mention of it anywhere else and you seem to be in the know on the alt text stuff. What is the order of things for an image in reference to alt text. Should alt text come before captions or after. The reason I ask is because I have found several articles recently that had alt text in different places and before I go moving it around I wanted to make sure I was right. Also I added a request to AWB for logic to remove wikimarkup and HTML from alt text within images. --Kumioko (talk) 17:41, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Logically, the alt text should come before the caption. Sighted readers usually look at the image before reading the caption. Similarly, it would make sense for readers using screen readers to have the image described to them first before reading about what makes the image important. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok thats kinda what I thought but wasn't sure thanks. --Kumioko (talk) 17:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The alt text that's in there now looks reasonable (I tweaked it only slightly). The remaining images still need alt text. I also modified Template:Location map~ so that you don't need alt text for every dot in the lead map. More, please! (And don't forget the lead map, please.) Eubulides (talk) 22:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Unreviewed articles

[1] Thanks so much ... I'm so far behind on that page! Thank you for following me around and picking up the pieces ... I really appreciate it ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 1999 speedy flrc

Sounds very reasonable indeed. I'm guessing we'll see a few more such speedies soon? I'll leave it open until tomorrow at least, but if I do a sweep, I'll include it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

About Bleach seasons

Could do the copy-edit for the 10th season instead for season 11 for now? The 10th season needs to be FL for the FT but the 10th season still has some time. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 19:32, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I saw your list. It's a good start to weeding out some issues. I was wondering though, if FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives should be included there. The FBI is a US government agency, so I would have thought that any text would be uncopyrightable. I'm assuming it's the fugitives descriptions and not the lead that have been identified as problematic, and that the descriptions have been lifted from fbi.gov. It may be plagiarism, but that's different from copyvio. Matthewedwards :  Chat  05:09, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Alt text

Thank you for the ALT text work and I took care of the one you mentioned, the same picture is used on the CMLL World Tag Team list and it already had ALT text so it was an easy fix ;) MPJ-DK (talk) 05:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics

Hi Dabom87! I would like to thank you for your contributions to the article Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics and the review of the list Evaluation of the Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. However, I do not understand why you removed several links and kept others. Could you explain? Regards; Felipe Menegaz 02:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

If possible, participate in the Peer review for Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. Cheers; Felipe Menegaz 02:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. For the links, I did not "remove them"; rather, I moved them down. Per WP:BOLDTITLE, we generally shouldn't be using links in the bolded first appearance of the article's title. So, I moved the links down to the next appearance of the terms. I'll see if I can take a look at the peer review later this week, but I can't promise anything. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I refer to this revision in which you removed links to countries, cities and dates. Regards; Felipe Menegaz 04:01, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, sorry for the misunderstanding. Per WP:OVERLINK, we shouldn't link common terms (such as continents) or dates, becaues they are not relevant to the readers' understanding. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, thanks! Felipe Menegaz 17:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

talk

With all due respect Dabomb87, please see the discussion at: Talk:List of Daytona 500 pole position winners (move-rename). thanks. ;) — Ched :  ?  05:24, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted to apologize if any of my comments or questions came across as "short" or "abrupt". I also wanted to thank you for your help. All my best, — Ched :  ?  03:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Not at all. It was past midnight for you, and seeing that change might have surprised you a bit. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:20, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

re Wikipedia:Featured article review/Macedonia (terminology)/archive2

I changed my comment at the FAR from "delist" to "Keep", in light of the work done on the article since the nom started.

I also just wanted to stop by your talk page and say I appreciate the comment you gave me: Thanks for all your work at FAR.. It is nice to receive positive feedback on the work that I have been doing at FAR. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 22:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Not at all, I see your username on just about FAR that's up. Ironically enough, after I contacted you, a host of issues arose: dabs, dead links, sources of questionable quality, etc. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:56, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: FLRC

Thank you, will do in the future! iMatthew talk at 00:22, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Seasoned veteran

Yeah, I made that edit summary at Bill Russell without looking at the history of the page. I don't know anything about the album myself, but it does exist, at least. Zagalejo^^^ 03:58, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree, I don't that's a viable article. It's all original research. There's no precise, commonly used definition for the term. Zagalejo^^^ 02:09, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Script

Hi, I noticed that you are using my script, and I thought I would let you know that I have split the script into two, namely User:Plastikspork/monobook.js/script.js and User:Plastikspork/date.js. If you would like to use both, you can just add 

importScript('User:Plastikspork/monobook.js/script.js');

and 

importScript('User:Plastikspork/date.js');

to your monobook.js. Alternatively, if you are only using the date formatting buttons, you can just add the date.js script. Let me know if you have any questions, comments, bug reports, suggestions, requests, or really anything. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 21:41, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Will do, thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 23:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

4 Minutes (Madonna song)

Hi Dabomb. I have celaned up this article as well as copyediting the language and prose as best to my abilities, even enlisting the help of another experienced user. Do you think now its FA worthy? --Legolas (talk2me) 06:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Samus Aran peer review

I think I've resolved all of your comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Samus Aran/archive1 now. If you have any follow-up comments, please post them at Wikipedia:Peer review/Samus Aran/archive2, thanks. Gary King (talk) 21:21, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Dabfinder script

I imported the script, as you told, but I still don't find the tool. How and where does it appear? Parutakupiu (talk) 23:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Did you bypass your cache? The redirect fixer is in the "toolbox" on the left side of the interface, near the bottom. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:16, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I see that now, thanks! Parutakupiu (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Senedd

Hi, You made a comment on the above article for the FAC, can you please check my reply to ensure that I have addressed your point regarding disambiguation links. If I have, can you confirm this ...thanks. Seth Whales (talk) 17:30, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Nom

Why you have removed the nomination of List of tallest residential buildings in the world from its talk page ???? Nabil rais2008 (talk) 20:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

It is a list, not an article, and should have been submitted to featured list candidates instead of featured article review, which is only for articles that are currently featured. If you want to bring the list to featured status, I suggest you take it through peer review first. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

November Nine

Your thoughts/input here would be appreciated.---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Dashes in article titles

As far as I can tell, the MoS does not explicitly state whether or not to use spaces, but the example given for using a dash in an article name is Eye–hand span which does not use spacing. Can you show me a place in the MoS where it states to use spaces? Rreagan007 (talk) 03:54, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

  • "Spacing: All disjunctive en dashes are unspaced, except when there is a space within either one or both of the items (the New York – Sydney flight; the New Zealand – South Africa grand final; June 3, 1888 – August 18, 1940, but June–August 1940)." Dabomb87 (talk) 03:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah ok, I think I understand now. Sorry for my confusion. Rreagan007 (talk) 04:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
No problem, and thank you for your politeness and understanding. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

1987 Hurricanes FLC

Heh. Your timing is incredible. I was just heading back there to get the link for you to re-comment on this prickly reference thing, and you'd already arrived there. Spooky. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I had it watchlisted, so that takes some of the mystique away, but we may well have some sort of intercontinental psychological connection. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:59, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to think so...! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Ralph Bakshi

I did some more work on the article. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 18:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC))

Request

Hey Dabomb. I left a response to your concern about alternative text at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 1996 Atlantic hurricane season/archive1. I wasn't sure whether or not you'd seen it. Cheers, Dylan620 (contribs, logs) 21:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Noted. I probably won't get to look at it till tonight; if not then, definitely tomorrow. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
OK. Thank you for your great work at FLC! Best, Dylan620 (contribs, logs) 22:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

WWI VC recipients

Hi there Dabomb, could I trouble you to revisit Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of First World War Victoria Cross recipients/archive1? It is coming up to the ten days and your review is outstanding. Many thanks, Woody (talk) 16:01, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for the review and the extremely quick response time! Regards, Woody (talk) 16:32, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Let's start over

I can see you are a good guy, but got caught in the middle. No hard feelings, I though you showed a lot of neck, however I respect your mgs to Ottava here. Its not your fight, and take care. Ceoil (talk) 16:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It's hard to not take sides. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:Chidel

Hey, thanks for that. I had a look round but I'd forgotten exactly where you'd said it. Much obliged old bean. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Marine Corps Brevet Medal

I think I took care of all the comments form this article, except the red links issue and I have started addressing them as well. Could you swing back by and take a look at your leisure. --Kumioko (talk) 15:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Alison Krauss FLC

I understand the bit about waiting for other users. :) I was simply wondering what I can do to fix your remaining concerns and earn your support. I purposefully included multiple sources for the so-so ACM link you pointed to to establish the nominations are confirmed elsewhere, and I'd be happy to remove the tenuous top 40 women thing, since it's just a blurb. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I always do full reviews of FLCs, but I review the oldest (near the bottom) first, so it may take a while until I reach yours. As a side note, it always helps when nominators review one or two other FLCs... ;) Dabomb87 (talk) 01:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

College of W&M alumni FLC

Hi Dabomb87 - I was just wondering if you'd close out your initial comments on the FLC for Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of College of William & Mary people/archive1 since all have been addressed. You can copy/paste the coding that Rambling Man used at the top to do the same. Since I'm apparently not allowed to close out other people's fully addressed concerns for them, I'm asking that you do it. It will condense the page and make navigating much easier for me. Thanks in advance, and if there are any new concerns about that FLC, I'm more than willing to work on those, too. Jrcla2 06:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

FAR

I'm not sure why you should feel obliged to wait. There are 47 FARs there, the most are abandoned, and a few others are already finished but Raul hasn't responded to my nag for over a week to have a look. I don't think people should be obliged to stop, not stopping might lead to reform. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I've given him another nag. Maybe a second might help YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
I wonder what will happen if it gets piled up to 100 by next year. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 01:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
You know what they say, the chattering monkey gets the banana. If you ping somebody enough, they'll get the message. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:40, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

It'd funny if 20 Australian articles got nominated and they never got closed because I was trying to be invovled YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:08, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

The club of Panionios announced officially they signed Rice

That is as official as it gets. Also, talkbasket.net is an official media partner of the Euroleague, according to the website euroleague.net http://www.euroleague.net/euroleaguenews/media-collaborators/main I am sorry that my being courteous and posting the English links, instead of the Greek one from the club bothered you so much. But I guess the club itself is not "official" to you. Also eurobasket.com announced it. http://www.eurobasket.com/Greece/basketball.asp?NewsID=167185 The 3 revert rule also applies to everyone. --Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 21:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I see now (it would have helped to mention that earlier). Sorry for reverting and being abrupt, but I like to tread carefully with BLPs. I will restore your addition. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
You don't have to restore my edits. You can just leave it. I just updated it because he signed with Panionios. I was not trying to cause an issue, but it seems to be one. I meant 3 revert rule for removing that he signed with the club, not the source, though I guess I am not sure exactly how that works. Either way it does not matter if it listed at his page because I updated the team page to put him on the roster. Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 22:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
No, it seems you are in the right, and I have restored your sourced addition. I also removed two of the external links or his profile; we don't need more than necessary, and ESPN is probably more reputable than CSTV (though backed by CBS) and DraftExpress. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Well these things are always a big issue because of the different language issues. Like in this case, something like ESPN announcing it, would be from a Greek equivalent of ESPN, but it would be entirely in Greek language. Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 22:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
What we can do is use one of the Greek "official sources" in conjunction with talkbasket (for English speakers' convenience). Dabomb87 (talk) 03:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Question

Are you a NASCAR fan by any chance? I wouldn't mind a little advice on that list if you have time. ;) — Ched :  ?  05:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Not a NASCAR fan, but I like most sports. I'll take a look later today. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Matthewedwards's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talk:Tim Donaghy/GA1

Hi, I am wondering if you can help deal with this review since I am quite busy lately with real life. There are some outstanding prose issues that need to be addressed. Thanks—Chris! ct 20:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, will take a look. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
I've updated what remains outstanding, in my view. Resolute 00:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Looks a lot better at a quick glance. I will try to give it a more thorough review tonight or tomorrow, but can't promise anything before Thursday. Resolute 23:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
The part on the betting scandal in Tim Donaghy is very similar to 2007 NBA betting scandal. Should something be done?—Chris! ct 02:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
I think that's because a previous editor simply copy-pasted the relevant part of the main article into this one. I'll slim it down a bit. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:25, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
I've taken a second look, and after your changes have listed it as a GA. Congrats! I do have one minor question outstanding. Cheers, Resolute 03:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Chidel

Yeah, I'm aware of that second unblock request. I'm leaving it to an uninvolved admin to make a decision! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I know not many Wikipedia users seek admiration, or often receive it, but I just wanted you to know that your recent edits to the article: Food waste in the United Kingdom, have been much appreciated and made me a happier user. Whatever your motives, have this cookie and my thanks. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 19:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't do much, but I appreciate it. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps

Would you consider nominating the list of cutaneous conditions with me for consideration for the main page, asking that an exception be made for this particular list? I realize it may not get far, but perhaps it's worth a shot? I am asking you, because I do not have much experience in this area? Regardless, thanks again for all your help in the past! ---kilbad (talk) 18:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Forgive my cautious approach, but I think it would be a bit too radical to just put in a request on the main page, knowing all the bureaucracy that goes on. I think the sensible approach would be to broach the subject on the talk page of the request list and see what other TFAR regulars think about it. It would be best if you started that discussion, and I'll keep a watch on it and offer my two cents if necessary. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good! Done. ---kilbad (talk) 18:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Main page

It's pretty pointless; a video game on August 16 gives MP3 a point total of -2. I'd like to just leave it in the queue until the date passes or it is scheduled; if no article takes that day's slot, then Raul sometimes goes to the queue to grab something. Gary King (talk) 22:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, didn't see that. Cheers. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:42, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Wouldn't Simpsons have 0 points since it gets 1 for anniversary, and then -1 since it's going to be on September 16, but on August 16 there was a video game? Gary King (talk) 22:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I thought it was −2 points for within one month, so it would be −1 w/ anniversary point (pity you didn't get it to FA before last September!). Still, if you might as well try as long as there's nothing on the request page (unless there's a rule against putting something with negative points up). Dabomb87 (talk) 23:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I might as well just wait a few days to put up Ghost then, just in case. Gary King (talk) 23:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Subject vs. title

Re: Outline of knowledge

In list articles, including lists, outlines, timelines, glossaries, and indexes, the type of page it is is included in the page title. But the article isn't about itself, therefore it is inappropriate to include the title in the lead. But it is appropriate to include the subject in the lead, and to bold the subject there.

The Transhumanist 23:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:BOLDTITLE, if the list name is not repeated verbatim, it shouldn't be bolded. Also, we shouldn't put links in bold. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I followed WP:BOLDTITLE precisely. The Transhumanist 23:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dabomb87/Archive_11&oldid=1190130689"