User talk:Cirt

WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia.
Nominations: Gedling Town F.C. (talk | history | start review) • Reggie Barnes (skateboarder) (talk | history | start review) • Exile (American band) (talk | history | start review) • Jude Law (talk | history | start review) • Blackpink (talk | history | start review) Reassessment: Mezhyhirya Monastery • Fallout 3 • Muhammad in Islam • Angels in Neon Genesis Evangelion • Northallerton • Task forces: Project quality • Sweeps • GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013)
Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations list | edit

AFD/T • T-7 • T-2 • AFDO • AIV • RFUB • UAA/CAT • RFPP • PER • CSD • AB • FAR • FAC urgents • TFAR • Google Search Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Other neat portal ideas for longer term

• Longer term ideas to think about from other portals:

1. Events section, like: "On this day" e.g., Biography, Religion, United States; "Selected anniversaries" e.g., War; "Calendar" at Holidays. Interesting idea of "Month selected anniversaries", at Oregon.
2. Model intro with some rotating images, after Portal:Oregon, Portal:Indiana, Portal:Iceland/Intro and Portal:Philosophy of science/Intro.
3. Revamp DYK sections w/ free-use images, model after Portal:Criminal justice and Portal:Oregon.
4. Portal palettes at User:RichardF/Palettes/Portals. Comparable color schemes can be developed from the various hue lists at User:RichardF/Palettes. Also see Portal:Box-header.
5. If there are a lot of categories, then categories section to 2 columns, like in Portal:Indiana.

   Also take some time to check out style/formatting at Portal:Indiana Cirt (talk)

Note to self

• MakeRef
• Reflinks

independent reliable secondary sources

• User:Citation bot/use

• {{findsources}}

Cite templates

<ref>{{cite book| last =  | first =  | authorlink =  | coauthors =  | title =  | publisher =  | year =  | location =  | page =  | url =  | doi =  | id =    | isbn = }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite news| last =  | first =  | coauthors =  | title =  | work =  | language =  | publisher =  | page =  | date =  | url =  | accessdate =  }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite journal|last =| first=| authorlink=| coauthors=|title=|journal=|volume=|issue=|page=|publisher=|location = | date = | url = | doi = | id = | accessdate = }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite web| last =  | first =  | authorlink =  | coauthors =  | title =  | work =  | publisher =  | date =  | url =  | format =  | doi =  | accessdate =  }}</ref>

Citation model

The Simpsons (season 3)

Body text in-cite

<ref name="REFNAME">[[#LASTNAME|LASTNAME]], p. PAGENUMBER</ref>

References section

(reference template from WP:CIT)

*<cite id=LASTNAME>REFERENCE</cite>

Different model

• Template:Citation
• Template:Harvnb
• Example: <ref name="REFNAME">{{Harvnb|LAST|YEAR|p=PAGENUMBER}}</ref>

See models at The General in His Labyrinth and Mario Vargas Llosa.

More info. Cirt (talk)

More at Wikipedia:Harvard citation template examples.

And Template talk:Harvard citation no brackets.

Cirt (talk)

Dispatch

Cirt, Awadewit suggested that you might be interested in writing a Signpost Dispatch article on Featured portals (the only area of featured content we haven't covered). Sample previous articles are at {{FCDW}}. We've covered:

• Featured content overview
• Peer review
• Did you know
• Featured lists
• Good articles
• Featured sounds
• Featured topics
• Images
• TFA
• And Featured articles many times: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-21/Dispatches, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-10-13/Dispatches

None of them start out looking like that: if an editor initially just chunks in some text, many others chip in to tweak it up to Signpost standards. For example, someone wrote this, which Karanacs, Royalbroil and I turned into this, so if you just chunk in some text as a start, others can help finish it off. Another example, I put in this outline, and Karanacs brought it up to this. Other editors have written almost complete and clean Dispatches without much need for other editing. If you're interested, please weigh in and coordinate at WT:FCDW In case you're interested, you could just begin sandboxing something at WP:FCDW/Portals and pop over to WT:FCDW to leave a note when you're ready for others to help out. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Will mull this over and most likely draft something up. Cirt (talk) 11:54, 18 November 2108 (UTC)

Razzies progress

• 15th Golden Raspberry Awards through 29th Golden Raspberry Awards = reformatting process done.
  • Note: Going to have to go back and model these after the modifications made subsequently to 29th Golden Raspberry Awards.
• 29th Golden Raspberry Awards - so far only one expanded with sourcing research. (WP:FL)
• Razzie Award for Worst New Star = reformatting process done, next to use Talk:Razzie Award for Worst Picture as model to reformat other pages in Category:Golden Raspberry Awards by category (with subsection breaks by decade)

Cirt (talk)

Undelete TeeChart

Greetings,

I'm following up on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teechart and last status on the TeeChart draft proposal at User:Mmbcn. After my penultimate edit your comment was:
"Looks a little bit better, though there still appears to be lots of unsourced bits. -- Cirt (talk) 12:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)"
I've made some edits to the page since then, removing comments that could be interpreted as subjective by nature and adding in additional references to substantiate content. Please consider whether the page now meets inclusion criteria.
Mmbcn (talk) 10:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Still seeing some unsourced bits, in the History subsection. As a side note, citations go after punctuation, not before. -- Cirt (talk) 00:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Have added additional source reference for the history section and citations have been moved behind punctuations. Mmbcn (talk) 15:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Looks better. :) Citations look like they could still use some formatting, using WP:CIT. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I've toothcombed back through the references tidying up any inconsistencies and trying to match-up with WP:CIT. If there is any particular syntactical format that remains incorrect please let me know. Thanks. Mmbcn (talk) 09:59, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay looks a tad bit better. However, citations are missing info and some fields, like author, work, publisher, original date of publication. Some citations appear to still be just bare links. -- Cirt (talk) 10:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I've checked through the references and filled-out information as available. Some weblinks don't have all of the field-info at source (work, publisher, etc) but I've put the maximum details available, at least surpassing Cite web's minimum url and title required parameters in most cases. Other reference types are now generally richer in content. Mmbcn (talk) 17:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Looks a little better, thanks. :) It is lacking a lede section, please see WP:LEAD. -- Cirt (talk) 20:28, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, better with the lead; it made sense to get rid of the introduction to create it. I assume the lead section would be a good place to put an image if something relevant could be found, though rather than squeeze something not-quite-right in now, I'd prefer to go with the format as it is at present if that seems ok as it stands. Mmbcn (talk) 15:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it looks alright now. Nice work. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 20:57, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! ..and thanks very much for your feedback and guidance, the current page is very different to the one that started out! I imagine the original page request has expired, should I use the content as the basis to start out with a new page request? Mmbcn (talk) 09:44, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Matix Group Article un-deletion request

I have provided necessary citations & reference sources post deletion. Request to UN-delete the june 22nd version & have a review for additional improvements. Bhanukaran (talk) 06:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC)bhanukaran

Where? -- Cirt (talk) 20:14, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

CheFEM page

Cirt, Could you move the CheFEM page to the suggested subspace for further implementation of the suggested improvements. We do not know how to do this. Thanks, Kate —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kate P Stuart (talk • contribs) 06:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done! -- Cirt (talk) 20:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Shon Brooks

Hello,

I have listened to everones objections and have addressed these concerns. I have rewrote the entire article on my userdraft space and have added credible sources. Please bring this article so we can add it to the main page. Thank you for your time and patience on learning your system.

FYI: Hershey Chocolate failed 7 times prior to making it to the empire it is.

Habeebah (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Habeebah

Where is the draft page, please provide a link to it? -- Cirt (talk) 20:15, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleted InTopSens page

Hi Cirt,

I am somewhat frustrated and dismayed to have been alerted to the InTopSens page having been deleted. I was not even aware that its continuation was being debated. I wish to contest this deletion, and address the comments of the debate:

The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 08:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC) [edit] InTopSens

   InTopSens (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log • AfD statistics)
   (Find sources: "InTopSens" – news · books · scholar · images)

Previously speedy deleted page, that even though has had a lot of work on it fails WP:GNG.

The ref's given are as follows :

   * GRACE Related Projects: InTopSens - is at least part written by the article's creator and member of the project.

No, that is un unfair and untrue assumption. I have nothing to do with Grace.

   * Quadriga Newsletter - the project is mentioned only in one 5 line section in a 7 page newsletter.

Thats because there is a lot of work going on in many projects, 1000s, but each are taken up with 10's or 100s of thousads of hour of work.

   * Blood poisoning bacteria identified faster has the feel of a press release.

   * Farfield to Join New Research Consortium called "INTOPSENS" also has the feel of a press release.

I was asked to cite references of InTopSens.

As such feel that the coverage does not meet the WP:GNG, with regard to being both significant and independent. Codf1977 (talk) 11:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

It is significant and independent as a piece of work currently being undertaken. If or when the technology works it will be commericalised after the project and will lead to savings of 100s of thousands of lives per year just in Europe. But by then it will be called something else and be lef by someone else.

   * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. -- UtherSRG (talk) 11:45, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
   * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- UtherSRG (talk) 11:45, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
   * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- UtherSRG (talk) 11:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
   * Delete - fails WP:GNG as per nom, despite the hard work on the part of the nom and the author to make this article work. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
   * Delete. This is part of a long-running spam project aimed at inserting promotional articles on European research projects. A typical such article will be loaded with unhelpful jargon and vaguely described in terms of their "forward looking" aims, rather than actual achievements, as is this one: The consortium aims to develop a compact polymer and silicon-based CMOS-compatible Lab on a Chip sensor platform which is based on two label-free biomolecular recognition optical sensor technologies. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

This is not SPAM. This is a European Commission funded project! We have cut the jargon back as far as we can without it losing scientific credibility. Of course its 'forward looking' as its a RESEARCH project, its not the result of work! If you want we can put the achievements to date, the project is now half way through and we have partial results already. We can put: "The consortium has developed a compact polymer and silicon based CMOS compatible biosenor chip for a Lab on a chip platform...."

   * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this research project. Joe Chill (talk) 18:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Find me some that do?

   * Delete It is insignificant and hasn't given anything for the biomedical sector. HaterofIgnorance (talk) 00:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

No, and it wont have until its finished.

Dannyhill (talk) 13:43, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to provide a copy as a subpage of your userspace page. That way, you could work on a proposed draft version, in order to research whether or not there has been significant coverage in secondary sources independent of the subject. -- Cirt (talk) 20:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Please do so, what sort of secondary sources can you suggest where details of 80% of the work are secretative? Cheers, 147.156.100.201 (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Please take a moment to read the page WP:NOTE, as well as these links: independent reliable secondary sources. -- Cirt (talk) 17:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Re : Knight and day page permission

Hi,

Thanks for adding those positive reviews.

Could you please consider my request to give me permission to edit this page.

I would have to add few more reviews and make it a little justified one..

Waiting for your reply..

Thanks.

coolguychn

Might be a good idea to build up a bit more experience first, before taking that step. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Junko Sakurada

I got mixed up. Reverted it because it looked like gooblegook, then wondered if I was misunderstanding language representation, so unreverted and got all confused. I left a message on the editor's page. Compared to other types of vandalism, if this is one it is trivial. Time for a break. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:53, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Agree and agree. Maybe not vandalism, but BLPs need very solid sources. Now I begin to wonder if I am tough enough on the ones I start and watch. Probably not... Aymatth2 (talk) 02:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

To further educate ...

I have added "no wuckers" to the no worries definition. You needed further edamucation. ;-) billinghurst sDrewth 03:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, um, you added a source, that fails WP:RS. :P I brought it up, on the article's talk page. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 03:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

And now  Done. :) -- Cirt (talk) 03:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Matix Group Article un-deletion Request

Bhanukaran (talk) 12:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)bhanukaran

Talk:Matix GroupBhanukaran (talk) 07:07, 24 June 2010 (UTC)bhanukaran We have provided necessary citations & references.

Since june 22nd version cannot be un-deleted w/o your approval, we have created a dummy sandbox test link that would enable you to check & verify the changes incorporated.

Request to un-delete the june 22nd version which can reflect these changes with necessary citations & source references.

Matix Group Article un-deletion Request

Talk:Matix Group Bhanukaran (talk) 12:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)bhanukaran We have provided necessary citations & references. Request to un-delete the june 22nd version which can reflect these changes with necessary citations & source references.

Link to the article draft please? -- Cirt (talk) 17:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Article "StingRay Manufacturing"

Hello Cirt,

I am hoping that you can help me. I would like to recover the deleted StingRay Manufacturing article for my own use. I do not wish to put it back on Wikipedia but only want my work for my own benefit. Can you please Email me the article content? Thank you for your help.Grupler (talk) 03:54, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Grupler/StingRay Manufacturing. -- Cirt (talk) 03:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help!Grupler (talk) 20:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome

Thanks for the welcome. Hopefully I will have something to contribute. Lyncs (talk) 04:38, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 04:39, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

See, that is what I love about Wikipedia. There is always something to click on and you learn something new! Thanks again, and cheerio. Lyncs (talk) 04:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Matix Group Article un-deletion request

Talk:Matix Group Bhanukaran (talk) 06:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)Bhanukaran

I have provided necessary citations & reference sources post deletion. Request to UN-delete the article & have a review for additional improvements.

Link to the article draft for review as requested. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&oldid=369529428

"we have created a dummy sandbox test ..." -- Question: Who is this "we" you referred to, above? -- Cirt (talk) 06:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Can you help advise this editor?

Not my day. First an IP is calling me a thug/vandal/criminal/spook/disinformation agent, and now another editor is telling me we can't call some characters from the Trojan War mythical without a direct confrontation with Nennius. Could you possibly look at Talk:Trojan genealogy of Nennius and explain things to the editor? I'm asking you because you denied, correctly, his request for protection of the article. (And there aren't that many editors around right now). I'm in 2 content disputes with editors who don't understand or like the way we work and it's getting irritating. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:08, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Steve Eichel

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 00:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Stacy Deletion

Hello,

What was needed to prevent the article from being deleted? I am Stacy Rugely and had a biographer do my article which had links, proof, my IMDB and other listings, pages etc. I'm not used to this wiki so much, as far as editing it etc. Stacy Rugely, Oplexicon (talk) 00:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oplexicon (talk • contribs) 00:26, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

"had a biographer do my article ..." — are you saying there is more than one individual in control of the Oplexicon (talk · contribs) Wikipedia account? Please see WP:NOSHARE. -- Cirt (talk) 00:28, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Recall RFA

Though this is a somewhat late reply, thank you for the barnstar endorsement. :) Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 19:34, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Re : Knight and Day Page

Hi.

It seems someone has updated the wrong value of rotten tomatoes rating in critical reception section.

Currently its 53 % in rotten tomatoes website. But its updated in the wiki page as 47 %.

For reference:

http://beta.rottentomatoes.com/m/knight_and_day/

So can you please look into it and do the needful

Thanks

Sriram —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.13.211 (talk) 17:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

User:Grk1011 made that change, you would have to ask him, at: User talk:Grk1011. -- Cirt (talk) 19:34, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Still need a pro review...

Pl_ease? :L ResMar 02:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

User uploading copyrighted images under false licenses

Hi Cirt. I was wondering if you could help (or send me to an admin that can) with a user uploading images and giving them a [false] license of public domain or either CC-by-SA-3.0. I've already CSD three (there are many more). See here, here, here and here is their upload log. This one I don't even understand. They have been warned on their page... but apparently is not willing to engage in any discussion or desist in fallaciously uploading copyrighted work. Thanks. :) Mike Allen 02:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Well it looks like Fastily has already delete the three images above. Do I have to go through all of their other uploaded images and find the image on the web they copied? Or should all the remaining images be deleted now? Mike Allen 02:35, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you could ask Fastily? -- Cirt (talk) 20:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Nikki Gordon-Bloomfield

Any chance of getting this page back up? She's definitely notable in the EV community today appearing on the Discovery site (http://news.discovery.com/tech/five-things-electric-vehicles-need-to-do.html) and the Bridgestone Rally (http://www.eco-rally.org/nikki-gordon-bloomfield-eco-transport-broadcaster. --Steve Radford (talk) 22:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest working on a draft proposed version, within a subpage of your userspace. If you like, I could userfy a version of the deleted article for you. :) -- Cirt (talk) 20:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

RE:AfD

I noticed that you closed and deleted this article. I also saw that it was speedy re-nominated, after being closed via non admin. However, when it was closed, it should have been no consensus, not speedy re-nominate. Also, when it was re-nominated, it only received 1 !vote. (Which was the same as the first discussion.) I think you should take another look at that article and possibly restore it. Undead Warrior (talk) 22:55, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done, restored it, and relisted it, back at AFD. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Mary Sue Hubbard

Hi Cirt,

I edited the Wikipedia Mary Sue Hubbard entry. Her DOB is stated repeatedly to be June 17th 1931, but there is a sentence which is clearly inaccurate "She became involved in Hubbard's Dianetics in 1952 at the age of 19". Unless she spent at least one year of her life in a state of suspended animation, this is obviously not true (people age at the same rate as the planet, 20.5 years had elapsed by Jan 1952, she really couldn't have been under 20!). I have twice tried to amend this obvious error, but you keep undoing my good work. A little overzealous, perhaps? The sentence I am changing is not a quote, but a statement and one that clearly conflicts with the rest of the encyclopedia entry. The message "Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed." must be taken subjectively - I must have mislead you in the appearance of my edits, they were in no way supposed to constitute vandalism, but good intentioned correction of an obvious mistake. I might say that "your editorial efforts appear to constitute weak thinking, or incompetence', but again I am sure this is subjective and not what you meant. If this is purely because I haven't logged in, maybe you could do some sums, demonstrate to yourself that the sentence I want to edit is in conflict with the rest of the article and then amend it using your holier-than-thou login?

64.128.200.86 (talk) 21:32, 29 June 2010 (UTC)wan

Please discuss at the article's talk page, instead of here, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 21:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Please don't provide messages like: "Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Mary Sue Hubbard. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 20:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)" which direct me to respond to you at this page unless that's what you actually want, thanks. 64.128.200.86 (talk) 22:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)wan

Discussion of the article goes at the article's talk page. Your edits made unsourced changes with no explanation as to why. The article's talk page is the best place to discuss and explain your edits, as well as using an edit summary in your edits. As for the info in question, I have removed it - I hope that is satisfactory now to you. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 22:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that Cirt. I guess I was just frustrated at having a sensible edit undone twice by the same person. I'm not familiar with Wikipedia's policies and apologise if I am 'doing it wrong' (I'm new & don't even have an account, that's why I didn't log in). It must be a huge task trying to protect a site like this from wanton vandalism and I appreciate your efforts have positive intent. Who knows, I might even get an account on here, I LOVE telling people what to think... ;) -- 64.128.200.86 (talk) 22:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)wan

Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 22:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamali Fine Art

Mystical Expressionism should have been deleted and was not, Jamali Fine Art should not have been but was. Please review. extransit (talk) 01:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done, deleted the first, userfied the 2nd, now at: User:Extransit/Jamali Fine Art. -- Cirt (talk) 16:16, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

User talk:174.3.101.230

Hey, 174.3.101.230 AKA 100110100 is now using his talk page to engage in some outing. While I know it is not oversightable, can his edits be rev del? He also is trying to trick folks into giving permission for him to edit after the block expires by removing any attempt I make to remind him that he is community banned. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 05:20, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Suggest WP:AIV again for that, or WP:ANI. -- Cirt (talk) 16:16, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

List of Celebrity Scientologists

Cirt- In the Celebrity Scientologist page, Jada Pinkett Smith is listed among those in the template. However, she has not been confirmed as a Scientologist, and I consider the information to be inaccurate. I contacted her PR office to make sure, and they agreed the information is inaccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Passomouse (talk • contribs) 19:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

That is both a violation of WP:NOR, and most certainly not a reason to blank out an entire subsection of information cited to multiple WP:RS sources. -- Cirt (talk) 23:19, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Add handling of no parameter to Template:Twitter

I saw you were the last admin to update Template:Twitter. Since it's locked to non-admins, I was wondering if you could add handling of no parameters? See Template talk:Twitter#Add handling of no parameter?. I posted the code you need there too. Thanks!! --Dan Leveille^TALK 22:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of TM and Cult Mania

The article TM and Cult Mania you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:TM and Cult Mania for things which need to be addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)