Jump to content

User talk:The Earwig

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a member of the Bot Approvals Group.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Philcha (talk | contribs) at 06:17, 30 August 2009 (→Back to the Earwig: stability). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Whew!

That gave me a scare. I forgot about the "The" in your username and came upon on the userpage of an indef blocked user. Anyways, is that reword board proposal still up? I finally got the nomination things right this time. So-*Gurgle* There's my stomach, so I'll be back in a while! P.S. Like my new sig? Cheers, Abce2|Aww nutsWribbit!(Sign here) 22:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reward board thing is still active, so feel free to work on that. I'm actually debating whether I should redirect User:Earwig to User:The Earwig, mainly for the reason you mentioned. Earwig is, after all, my IRC nick, and I'm worried that a lot of people have trouble finding me because of that problem. I've tried and failed to get my name changed to plain ol' Earwig, without The in it. Unfortunately, he made too many edits (most of which were vandalism, but regardless). Anyway, good work on your sig! I like the Aww nuts and Wribbit!(Sign here) things. Thanks for dropping by, The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 22:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 03:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I'm still waiting for the article Earwig to be looked at. Any idea the average time it takes to between the article nominated to it being reveiwed?Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 23:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It can be anywhere between a half a month and three months, but it really depends on the workload at WP:GAN. I don't think it should be longer than a month, but you never know how things will turn out. And honestly, if you want my input, it won't pass unless we can remove {{unreferenced}} from the "appearance and behavior" section. The rest of the article is very good, but it's that section that concerns me. Maybe I'll have a go at it soon to see what I can do. The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 23:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I still get the award, right?:)Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 23:51, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, of course! (You still have to pick one, by the way: The Barnstar of Diligence or a start-class article of your choice.) I'll upgrade that to a C-class article if you can reference that section. The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 00:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'm going to try that, so give me some time. I'll start in a while, I just busted a sockpuppeter with over 30 socks and I need to eat something.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 00:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I got the sourcing done. Tell me if I missed anything.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 01:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, that's fine. Good work! The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 01:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! What's a C class article?Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 01:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is listed at Template:Grading scheme, along with the other article classes. The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 01:57, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. So does the earwig article look good enough for a good article or so? Anything else that needs work on it?Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 02:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) It's a good page, but there are still some things that are bothering me. Personally, I'd like to see the images cleaned up. They're not very organized, and I find them to be a nuisance when reading the article. I'd also appreciate it if you could remove the dead external links, and clean up the More information section, which is far from nice to look at. But beyond that, I still feel like it is "missing something." I'd like to see some more content in the article, preferably about their life cycle (see how I did it at ringlegged earwig; you might find this page useful), and their impact on humans, as seen here. Not all of these things are necessary, but it might be helpful if we want the GA to pass. The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 02:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List

1:images Though there is one I had a little trouble with.

2:remove dead links removed

3:cleanup on aile More informaiton Done. I may have missed something though, so if so just tell me.

4:More content on lifesycle. Did I miss anything?

Okay, I'll start work on it, but I'm busy today so I'll be on and off.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 14:17, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anything else? I'm willing to help.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 17:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right now, all we can do is wait for someone to review it. Feel free to continue to add references and expand it a little, but I have no specific concerns. Thanks for your help! The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 19:47, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your welcome.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 00:13, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They skipped it.:) I know, I know, they didn't purpusly skipped the article, So anything else that I need to or can know about GAN while it's waiting to be reviewed?Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 02:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anything?(Sorry, I know your on vacation but I don't want this archived yet, so I am writing this.)Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 16:25, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When you come back, 1. I hope you are refreshed, 2. Still waiting for someone to review it, as it's been a month or so, and 3. What needs done that could make it a featured article, since I have alot of free time now.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 15:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! I finally got a reveiwer. But he/she has found some things that you may want to see.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 02:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Okay, thanks for telling me about the updates, and yes, I am refreshed. :) I am presently writing responses to the comments the reviewer has made; as you can see, there's a lot of work to be done. I'll do my best to respond to the majority of the comments and hopefully improve it a bit more. Thanks! The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 20:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm in a sticky situation right now on with a user. so I most likely will not have extra time to help. Sorry, Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 20:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'm back. Is there anything I could help with right away?Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 13:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anything?Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 21:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please? :)Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 22:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All I can suggest is that you take a look at one of the concerns illustrated in the GA review, and attempt to fix it. There are no specific things I need help with right now. Thanks, The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 23:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

talkback

Hello, The Earwig. You have new messages at Impala2009's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Outline Update - Basking in the light of knowledge - 07/28/2009

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 17 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Earwigbot category pouluator

Hi, is it possible instead of populating a category like Category:AfC submissions by reviewer subpages, it fills in a list on a user subpage? This is because of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 August 18#Category:AfC submissions by reviewer (and all subcategories). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Well, simply put, it is possible, but the category system is much easier. Here we would be talking about a bot constantly updating a subpage, while the category system is auto-maintained by parser functions and templates (not by the bot adding pages to it, this was only to speed it up in the beginning). I'd rather wait until the end of this discussion to see what can be done. Thanks for telling me though. Regards, The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 13:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

William Miller (criminal)

The article appears to meet policy, so I was WP:BOLD and created it. If you think it shouldn't have been created, please feel free to revert the move. Feinoha Talk, My master 19:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New text for Wikipedia

Dear Earwig,

What do you think of this? How about a new font for Wikipedia instead of the Arial or Helvetica text, how about the text of Adobe Garamond Pro. or Times New Roman? If you can do this, i will be very appreciated.

- George1822 —Preceding unsigned comment added by George1822 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! This is less of something that can be done on Wikipedia, and more of something that can be done in your browser. Most browsers have an option in their preferences enabling you to change the default font used on web pages (Wikipedia uses the sans-serif one, not the serif one). If you can't find the option, just tell me what browser you use, I could probably figure out where you can find it. Thanks! The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 23:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MfD

Sorry, I wasn't the deleting admin there, I just saw that an admin had deleted what seemed to be all the pages, so I closed it as a housekeeping matter. I will tag the remaining one for speedy deletion, as I am not an admin. Gigs (talk) 15:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, fair enough. Because you closed the debate, I naturally assumed that you were an admin, forgetting about non-admin closures. The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 15:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, over at MfD we have a lot of debates that are speedy closed for whatever reason, so NACs are a little more common. I usually put "NAC" at the end to tip people off, wouldn't you know the first time I forget to do that it causes confusion, hehe. Gigs (talk) 15:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

forum

Please use the article talk pages to discuss content. cygnis insignis 02:23, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, you're correct. I was simply informing the user about something that I did not consider to be particularly controversial, but it appears that this may require more discussion than I previously thought. Thanks, The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 03:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ACC

Hi. Can you please help me to drop the request that you had earlier commented on? I can't access into ACC now. I've no idea what's wrong. Thanks! BejinhanTalk 14:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two things. First of all, it would probably be better to email the user using the new "custom email" feature, telling them that they should contact unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org if they still want to create an account. This might be a better idea, because we won't leave them hanging and confused as to why their request was dropped. Second of all, it seems that the Toolserver is offline at the moment, which will explain why you are unable to access ACC. By an odd coincidence, the Toolserver went offline right when you were about to close the request. The only thing we can do right now is wait for it to go back online. Thanks, The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 14:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks! The toolserver is still down so I'll have to wait. :>) BejinhanTalk 02:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wipe Out Kids Cancer

Why did you decline Wipe Out Kids Cancer?

It is a Dallas-based Non-profit that has just as much right as Susan G Komen for the Cure (which was founded by Nancy Brinker, the step-mother of the founder of WOKC).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_G._Komen_for_the_Cure

Wipe out Kids Cancer is a 501c Non-profit that deserves a Wikipedia page.

It was founded around the same time Susan G Komen was.

-jsanderson

I'm sure your goal is noble, but Wikipedia is not the place for advertisement or PR. Your submission was a copyright violation, and that is strictly against Wikipedia policy. If you wish to have an article for your group, please do not take content from other parts of the internet, and back up everything with reliable sources to assert notability. Regards, The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 06:27, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion and poll on reviewer usergroup criteria

You may be interested in a discussion and poll I've started to decide the criteria that will be used for promoting users to the reviewer group at Wikipedia talk:Reviewers#New discussion and poll: reviewer criteria - please put your comments there. AndrewRT(Talk) 17:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


BarnSpam

The da Vinci Barnstar
For helping us clueless ones with scripted wonders; cheers!  Chzz  ►  02:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, thank you chzz! I really appreciate it. The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 02:47, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the Earwig

Where should I put the stuff about the predators?Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 03:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, the page could do with a bit of reorganizing. In the meantime, I think it would be best to add it to either the "behavior" section, or perhaps create a new section. I don't know; it depends on the content you're adding, and if it's enough to put in its own section. The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 03:10, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I don't think that it will be enough to get it's own section. Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 03:16, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to, you can expand it the part I just added. I'm just really tired and will edit again in the morning.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 03:26, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So, you gonna help with the earwig? :)Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 17:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Take your time; there's no rush. As for me, I have helped. See [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] Regards, The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 21:02, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean it like that. I meant it as since I finally have time to help that we could work together.Abce2|Aww nuts!Wribbit!(Sign here) 23:19, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Articles that are the subject of content disputes are disallowed by WP:WIAGA. Please see Talk:Earwig/GA1#Stability_of_article. --Philcha (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy bidet!

Someone told me it was your b;day, so I made you a cake.

Sorry it resembles a pacman.

Yes, I really am that bad at drawing.

But it's the thought that counts?

Have a good one, cheers!  Chzz  ►  00:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hahahaha! Alright, the fact that you wikilinked to a bidet was just hilarious. Thanks for the lovely cake; may I suggest a tablet of some sort? The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 04:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Earwig&oldid=310845980"