User talk:Aircorn

Good Article RfC

Hello, now that Hahc21 has unfortunately retired from Wikipedia, someone else needs to take over the RfC or else it will probably die. I am willing to help take it over but I don't know if it should be moved to Part II when there is still several proposals that are still undecided. I was hoping that you would have some sort of opinion on where this RfC should go next.--Dom497 (talk) 14:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dom. I left a rather long reply at the proposals page. I think we should just propose the most likely ones at WT:GAN and then just move forward from there. I always treated that RFC as a brainstorming exercise anyway. I am willing to have a go at copyediting your instructions page if you want (I will be quite brutal I fear) or you could propose it as is and see what others say. I am tempted just to introduce the tabs and number 6 boldly though as i can't see any complaints about them. AIRcorn (talk) 02:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I have no problem with you giving it a copy-edit if you want. As I was writing it I too did think I was going into too much detail but for some reason I just kept writing. :P --Dom497 (talk) 21:27, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I will also propose numbers 1 and 3 within the next few days (kinda busy right now).--Dom497 (talk) 21:28, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I am going to send out a message to all WP:GA members as it is better then just mentioning it on the nominations page.--Dom497 (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

How much longer do you think we should keep Part I going for? We got a good response from the notice I sent out and I think within the next week or two we should move to Part II. I talked with Hahc21 and got a good understanding of what he wanted Part II to be (which I kinda agree with and was similar to what you said about bringing it to WT:GAN).--Dom497 (talk) 20:05, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Your message worked well. I see we got another proposal which will happen with these open ended discussions (not a bad thing though). Three and six have enough response that I would just make an announcement on the main WT:GAN page along the lines of "Following a recent rfc (linked) the following proposals got unanimous support. If there are no further objections I will look to impliment the changes in a week or so."

• (Wording of proposal 3)
• (Wording of proposal 6)

BTW, I thought I saw Hahc editing again. AIRcorn (talk) 21:39, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Ya, he told me when I emailed him that in 2 weeks he may be fully back but for now he's just going to take it easy. Regarding the RfC, there are a few issues: with proposal 3, should come the redo of the nominations page that I worked on a while back. Hahc said he would take a look at and likely get rid of the "old green" so I don't think we should bring in the tabs just yet. Regarding proposal 6, how is that even supposed to be implemented??? Really, shouldn't it just go in the instructions or something?--Dom497 (talk) 23:38, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah it should I will add it in now. I am not sure that anything needs to be done to the nominations page except removing the instructions and adding the tabs. AIRcorn (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

So just to make sure I understand, when bringing in the tabs, the only thing that shouldn't be removed is the introductory rectangle, correct?--Dom497 (talk) 01:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thought it easier to simply give an example of what I was suggesting [1] AIRcorn (talk) 03:14, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I know I've been sending you so many messages but are the instructions complete or you still working on them?--Dom497 (talk) 15:49, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Done. You might want to get someone else to give it a going over. AIRcorn (talk) 10:22, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I asked Casliber (talk · contribs) if they wouldn't mind giving it a check. If they are happy I will mention it at WT:GAN (or you can if you want) and we can hopefully just do it within a week. AIRcorn (talk) 01:29, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I made some changes (mostly minor) that I think you should check (just for the sake of it). Also, how come you removed the "Giving a second opinion" part (just curious)?--Dom497 (talk) 20:37, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at the nominations draft...I liked your design better so I think we should go with that. I also added the intro. After you give the "clear" I think we can go ahead and officially add it and start a feedback process.--Dom497 (talk) 23:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Also, can you take a look at this page and make it sound better?--Dom497 (talk) 23:37, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

It was pretty good. I guess we are ready to go then. AIRcorn (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Just some food for thought; what are we going to do with the reassessment instructions?--Dom497 (talk) 01:14, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

They are still there under the reassessments page. AIRcorn (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

What I meant was are we going to move them under the instructions tab, just leave them as is, or do something else with them?--Dom497 (talk) 18:36, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I was just going to leave them where they are. I think it may confuse new reviewers if they were under instructions. After all this I see someone at WT:GAN still didn't notice the tabs. Still I think they have come up great. AIRcorn (talk) 06:58, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Stalled GA reassess

Hi Aircorn, Any suggestions on what to do with this reassess? [2] Don4of4 has not edited on WP since his last entry at the reassess page on March 8th.. How long do we wait? Best, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 22:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

We are still near the bottom of the pile (see WP:GAR for the full list). I am the only regular there and I will close it if need be, but would rather someone uninvolved did. I left a note at WT:GAN a while ago and got a few keeps and delists for some, but so far no one has stepped up to close any. AIRcorn (talk) 01:35, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I agree it would be best for another editor to close. Thanks for listing it at GAN and keeping things moving along as best you can. I suppose it will resolve itself in time. Thanks again, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 13:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello busy user

Hello Aircorn, Eduemoni has given you a shining smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shining Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy! Eduemoni↑talk↓ 04:08, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Lifting the Gibraltar DYK restrictions

A couple of months ago, you opposed a proposal to lift the restrictions on Gibraltar-related DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012. Could you possibly clarify (1) under what conditions you would support a lifting of the restrictions, and (2) when you think it would be appropriate to lift the restrictions? Prioryman (talk) 20:16, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dick Conway (rugby union), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Number 8 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

RfC: NSONG

Thanks for the suggestion to notify people from the earlier debate, not to mention your idea to start a RfC in the first place. Cheers,  Gong show 06:01, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem. It is running very smoothly so far. AIRcorn (talk) 00:13, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to Mini-RfC

Thanks for your comments on the Lisa Lavie AfD. I'm asking various editors for constructive comments or explanations on my talk page: User talk:RCraig09#Questions. Thanks, from RCraig09 (talk) 15:54, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thatcher funeral

In section of the funeral of Mrs.Thatcher I would add the comment of former Italian PM,Berlusconi.But I can not write in perfect English Mariacciolo (talk) 14:40, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

User:Aircorn/monobook.js

User:Aircorn/monobook.js is turning up in the MEDA cats because it contains the {{WPMED}}, which is being treated as a transclusion. Last I heard, Outriggr's script has not been working since the upgrade to Vector (several years ago) anyway. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:48, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I was trying to help someone out at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/New Proposals for GAN, Part II AIRcorn (talk) 12:52, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I think that you only need the first line to get the skin; Outriggr's script certainly has nothing to do with that, so you can remove that from your .js file. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Peer review request

Peer review request for Thomas Ellison I'm currently attempting to bring the article Thomas Ellison to Featured Article standard. I've opened a peer review, which can be viewed at Wikipedia:Peer review/Thomas Ellison/archive1—any feedback, however brief, would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.

- Shudde ^talk 07:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Goathouse Refuge

Hello! Thank you for helping us out with the Good Article status for Goathouse Refuge, is there anything else we need to do to improve it? Or is it good to go now and we can add the article back as a Good Article? --MangoDango (talk) 15:31, 24 April 2013 (UTC)