User talk:Sumoeagle179

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as: copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Adding such unreasonable information or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, and will result in your account being blocked.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. Again, welcome!

--WillMak050389 00:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFC West

You tagged AFC West for wikification. Is there any particular reason? What are your concerns with its wikiformat and other article issues? Thanks, Metros232 00:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: FU in article space

Because the use of fair use images on the main page, which is not in the main article namespace, is generally considered to be a mistake and is usually quickly undone. Further, the page on which I was removing the images is a Wikipedia space page, not a main article namespace page. If you have further questions, I'd be happy to answer. Thanks, --Durin 04:10, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute with Durin

I invite you to visit User:Husnock/Durinconcerns since I see you ahve also recently been spoken to about this user regarding image removal from pages. I am trying to keep a record of these disputes. -Husnock 09:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your inputs to my concerns page. This user is flat out dangerous and could wind up running a large amount of people away from this project. I am soon to be one of them, since much to my horror his activites were backed by a large number of well esablished users. It makes one wonder. -Husnock 18:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military brat

Hi Sumoeagle, I've started a discussion on the talk page for military brat about the new name, and what an appropriate name would be. I would love your input. Also, thanks for the support on the FAC. Military brat name Balloonman 22:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gilwell Park

You're right: Boy Scouts and Girl Guides. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Ya, that guy's being too Brit-centric and Gilwell is a major int'l site; and not everywhere has merged girls into Boy Scouts.Sumoeagle179 20:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are being to Yank-centric - your organisation in the USA may be called the Boy Scouts of America - but many associations around the world are co-educational (that means they accept both girls and boys as members - just wanted to clear that one up). The thing that links Boy Scouts in America and Scouts in the UK and other countries around the world is the word Scout. It is best when refering to Scouting on an international site to refer to us as Scouts and not imply gender, as this is incorrect in the majority of cases. We are now members of the worldwide family of Scouting - not a brotherhood. --82.20.30.137 17:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are being Brit -centric. Most orgs still aren't coed. Get an account or I won't even talk to you anymore.Sumoeagle179 18:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't talk - but I will still edit so that this article about a UK owned campsite is correct.--82.20.30.137 18:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)--82.20.30.137 19:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scouting

Hi Sumoeagle179... I will try to help with Scouting, although my feeling is that because of the age of the FAC nomination, the decision is going to go one way or the other regardless of further copy-editing. I will continue, but it will take a while to complete! –Outriggr § 10:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any help would be appreciated. Even if it fails, it'll have that much better chance when it gets renominated.Sumoeagle179 14:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: I gave a major copy-edit to the Scouting lead text. Please have a look. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

OK with me, made two small edits. I did see it says nothing about controversies, I suspect someone (Jagz?) will say something about that. Sumoeagle179 22:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bummer: I don't see any reason why these controversies should be in the summary. There are IMHO well covered in the body of the article, an article of its own, and on many other page. Thanks for the two edits. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Well, I actually agree with you, but you may know Jaqz is only interested in Scouting (ie, BSA) controversies, but at least he's half rational about it, unlike others we've met.Sumoeagle179 23:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing references

Hey, I noticed you fixed some references on the Gerald Ford page. I was wondering if you might like looking at some of the blanks in the reference section and see if you can fix those. I think #30 was one that needed fixing. If you're too busy, I understand. Thanks! Veracious Rey talk ↔ contribs 16:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. No, I'm not a boy scout. I checked out that article when reading about Gerald Ford's eagle scout award. I think I made a minor edit on that page. Thanks for the offer though. Veracious Rey talk ↔ contribs 17:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Japan FA nomination

Hi, on the page you said "stand-alone portal links go in the See also section". I honestly didn't understand what you meant by that. Please reply on my talk page with an explanation as to what needs to be done to the page. Thanks, John Smith's 21:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So it was just the issue of moving the portal icon down the bottom? Ok, thanks for clearing that up. John Smith's 23:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also p ut a picture in it for you.Sumoeagle179 00:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Military brat

Well, somebody beat me to the category of military brat, but I went through last night and updated all of the brats on the List of famous military brats to have the category on their page. Well, the category has already been nominated for deletion. The reasoning is because it is a "non-neutral" term and parental occupation is irrelevant. Thus, I'm letting people who have contributed to the Military brat article know so that they can support keeping the category. Here is the link to the discussion [1] Balloonman 20:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Ford

Are you able to address the remaining concerns at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Gerald Ford? Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderbra

Thank you very much for the help on this. One of your points was a not clear to me "Refs should never have external jumps, see fn 22 and 23 for what not to do". I wasn't sure what "fn 22 and 23". Thanks again Mattnad 20:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FN means footnote. THere are external jumps in those footnotes.Sumoeagle179 00:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I took another crack at it. There may be some more copy-editing due, but I tired to implement all of your recommendations. Since the citations seemed to be the area of greatest variance from GA format, I decided to work hard on using the Citation templates. There is still one nagging thing for me. Your suggestion to remove all external jumps in the references didn't make sense to me. When I looked for examples around Wikipedia for alternatives, the articles tended to have external jumps in "Notes" and "References." This includes Featured Articles.

If you don't mind, if I'm still doing it wrong, can you edit one of the offending references to show me how it should be done (or refer me to an example). I could just resubmit the article for GA review, but you were really great and I thought I'd go to you first. Mattnad 22:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

give me a day or two to get to this.Sumoeagle179 03:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA hold on NFL playoffs - clarification requested

Could you please clarify on the talk page of NFL playoffs which sections you feel need further referencing. I am fairly certain that every assertion of fact in the article is referenced to one of the references at the bottom, it will merely require me multi-referencing them to the statements you find questionable. I will work on your other suggestions as well (the lead and the referencing format) and get back to you when it is done. Again, if you could just indicate on the talk page of the article which specific statements in the article you feel need further referencing, I will link these to all needed references. Thanks in advance for your help! --Jayron 32 06:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have made all requested changes. All assertions of fact and all meaningful paragraphs have been referenced. Reference formats have been made uniform using standards spelled out in WP:MOS and WP:CITE using cite templates. Lead has been rewritten and expaned to more complete summary. Please review it again and pass it if you see fit! --Jayron 32 05:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine Tarsier Foundation GA hold

This is on GA hold for 7 days for: needs more refs (ex: all of background only has one), refs are not consitently formatted, not enough wikilinks. Sumoeagle179 23:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Failed GA, no action taken.Sumoeagle179 23:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am getting/working on the citations and have them offline, and isn't the 7th day on the 28th yet? Please re consider. Thank you. --Ate Pinay (talk•email) 04:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was only about one hour from that day and no action had been taken and I had no reason to expect any. If you address the issues, renominate it and let me know and I'll expedite it.Sumoeagle179 10:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your statement - "I had no reason to expect any" is very very low, and subjective for a fellow Wikipedian of stature! After having put so much time and effort into this article, any additional time for me is immaterial. Besides, I had to make sure everything is covered from my end, so as not to compromise the value and integrity of the article. Please look into my list of GAs in my userpage to understand me and how I work! In addition, in Wikipedia, we do not assume the negative! We always abide by WP:AGF. BTW, FYI, I am not re-nominating this yet. I have submitted this for WP:GA/R, just so you know. I hope you do not do the same thing to other well-meaning wikipedians next time. What I am trying to say is check the credentials or credibility of the major contributor first before you use the axe! Thank you for your time. --Ate Pinay (talk•email) 18:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should assume good faith also, with no response after over 6 days, I stand by my statement.Sumoeagle179 18:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, GA/R takes longer than an expedited renom.Sumoeagle179 18:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up. Sorry for the miscommunication. or the failure to communicate. I simply had so much in both RL and WL. Maybe i will take you up on your offer of the renom, if I can drag myself our of the depression of the failed GA. I will let you know before the week ends. It's just that I owe it to Bohol and its people to make this article WP:GA, which is my hope for all others in Portal:Bohol. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pinay06 (talk • contribs) 07:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Re:

Dear Sumoeagle179,

I saw you have been active with several featured articles. I just nominated the Ohio Wesleyan University article and I wanted to get your opinion and comments regarding its nomination. Thank you for your time! I really appreciate it! LaSaltarella 03:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feeder (band)

Hi!,

I just realised that you review the articles for GA status, regarding music topics, and am wondering what you think of the article concerned. I hope to bring it up to GA status and go from there :-).

If there are any problems, could you if possible please list them?.

Cheers!

Marcus Bowen 19:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tony's talk page

Although I, in part, agree with the sentiment behind your comment (see the FAC for CCMFC), please, lets not go making those sorts of comments about each other. Personality clashes occur, and this is natural, but it is better to raise objections to one's comments both a) in the right venue (WT:FA?), and b) in the right manner. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 03:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sumoeagle, keep OFF my talk page, you low-down little tic. Tony 04:02, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Dear Sumoeagle179,

It would be more than welcome - if you could find some time in order to review the Ante Starčević biography - which I nominated as a GA.

Best regards,

--BarryMar 12:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]