User talk:Go Phightins!/Archive 20

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Go Phightins!. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

←

Archive 18

→

Assistance request if you aren't too terribly busy

Heya Phightins, I know you have your fair share of Good Article experience and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind helping me out with something, if you aren't too busy that is. Well, here goes. I've never done much of the content writing (I don't think I'm very good at it to be honest) and I've never taken anything to GA status as a result but I have always wanted to take an article I've worked on (Bryan D. Brown) to GA status. I'm just not quite sure how the process goes or how to know if it's ready. I did however put the article up for peer review (link) a few months ago to kind of get a feel for what I should improve in regards to the article. That was a good experience for me as it generated a ton of ideas that helped me expand the article quite a bit (before after changes from beginning to end}. Anywho, I was wondering basically where to go from here. I looked at the GA criteria from Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment#Criteria and to me the article meets all the listed GA criteria so I'm not sure if that means I should submit it for GA review or something. But yeah, any advice, pointers, etc that you might have would be greatly appreciated good sir. Cheers, — -dainomite 05:20, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dainomite, I would be more than happy to take a look, but unfortunately, I won't get to it today, as I am only going to be home for about the next 15 minutes. I will try tomorrow afternoon to take a look, but if I forget, please ping me again. Out of curiosity (and feel free not to answer), I know you were in the Air Force; did you serve under Gen. Brown? Go Phightins! 11:15, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually, upon further review, that was a really dumb question, because though he was an aviator, he was in the army. Sorry about that :-) Go Phightins! 11:16, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I'm in no rush so feel free to do it at your leisure. No that is a perfectly reasonable question since he led joint commands like JSOC and SOCOM (whose command headquarters are made up of all four branches). But no I didn't serve under him. Anywho, thank you for the assistance good sir! — -dainomite 16:15, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

All right Dainomite, sorry I didn't get to this until today, but after reading through the article, I think it is pretty close to being a solid GA nominee. A few things, in no particular order:

The article could use a solid, top-to-bottom copyedit. There are some consistency issues surrounding the use or lack thereof of commas after introductory phrases (e.g., is it "In 2007, Gen. Brown ..." or "In 2007 Gen. Brown ...". Depending on your GA reviewer, he or she may be nitpicky about that, so it would be better to handle that before hand. You can request a copyedit from the guild of you'd like, or try to go through it yourself.
Reference-wise, I think it is solid. Not a lot of references, but the ones that you have are of good quality, cited often and correctly, and are reliable.
The lead shouldn't need those inline citations, as that information should be included (and cited) elsewhere in the article ... I think you could do a little bit of a better job summarizing the full content of the article in the lead. Generally, I go paragraph-by-paragraph or section-by-section and include a one to two sentence summary for each.
Neutrality-wise, I think you did a nice job, though there was limited mention of criticism he has received. Are there any notable controversies in which he has been embroiled? No need to dwell on them, but mentioning them (if they exist) would be prudent.

Other than that, I think you did an excellent job on this article, and I would think it would pass a GAN with a few additional changes suggested by your reviewer. I don't see any structural deficiencies, so my closing message would be to proofread and copyedit the prose (or get someone to do that for you ... extra sets of eyes are always helpful to me. Good work! Go Phightins! 22:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the in depth response Phightins, I really appreciate it. It's quite alright with me that you didn't get to it right away, no rush, I'm not on a deadline.

I put in a request for the guild copyedit the article because I too like an extra set of eyes looking over the article. Also I don't think I'm that great at copyediting. The only critisism or controversy I found was his minor involvement in the Pat Tillman fratricide incident; but even then it was just him going to the congressional inquiry and testifying before Congress. I've removed the lead refs since all those lines are indeed mentioned in the body of the article. I'll have to take a look at a better way of summarizing for the lead... hrmm... *puts on his thinking cap*. Thanks again! — -dainomite 04:00, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

In the media: Chelsea Manning, Box-office predictors, and 'Storming Wikipedia'

Recent research: WikiSym 2013 retrospective

WikiProject report: Loop-the-loop: Amusement Parks

Traffic report: Reddit creep

Featured content: WikiCup update, and the gardens of Finland

News and notes: Looking ahead to Wiki Loves Monuments

Technology report: Gallery improvements launch on Wikipedia

EotW/Gandydancer

Are you implementing the Award or is it Editor The Interior? ```Buster Seven Talk 13:07, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

A special barnstar for you!

		The Content Creativity Barnstar
		Well Phightins, you're doing really well out here. I wanted to leave a message of recognition for all the great GA work you do with Penn sport (and other) articles, and also something to say thanks for all the positive comments you gave at my RfA today. It's not hard for me to see you there yourself sometime, and I'll always be happy to nominate if you do. Rcsprinter (talk) @ 22:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Rcsprinter. Maybe some day. Right now, I am thinking about it. Go Phightins! 01:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I've had Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Go Phightins! watchlisted for quite sometime :p — -dainomite 04:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter

This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:

Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Piotrus (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), Dana boomer (submissions), Status (submissions), Ed! (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:55, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

In the media: Chelsea Manning, Box-office predictors, and 'Storming Wikipedia'

Recent research: WikiSym 2013 retrospective

WikiProject report: Loop-the-loop: Amusement Parks

Traffic report: Reddit creep

Featured content: WikiCup update, and the gardens of Finland

News and notes: Looking ahead to Wiki Loves Monuments

Technology report: Gallery improvements launch on Wikipedia

Attention Talk Page Stalkers - Free Barnstar Opportunity

Hello loyal talk page stalkers, I, the technical klutz, am having some issues with the template at 2013 Penn State Nittany Lions football team#August 31 vs. Syracuse. The scores for the third and fourth quarter are not displaying. Whoever can fix the problem will receive an award of some kind. Thanks in advance. Go Phightins! 21:15, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I've never used that template before Phightins but since |R3= |R4= |H3= |H4= have no parameters in them nothing is displayed. I assume that's what you're referring to. In preview with numbers in them it displays correctly though. Cheers, — -dainomite 21:27, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, well, it seems to work for me too, but that's bizarre, as earlier they didn't appear even in preview mode. Thank you! Go Phightins! 21:31, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

No problemo!

— -dainomite 21:34, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've put in dashes in the meantime. These parameters need to be given a value, otherwise they don't display at all. Seems like a hyphen (-) acts as a placeholder, and maintains the score from previous quarters. I assume the game isn't over yet (or is ending soon), so they can be filled in afterwards. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Right, it's in the third quarter now. Go Phightins! 21:42, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Luis Garcia (pitcher)

Hello! Your submission of Luis Garcia (pitcher) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Bloom6132 (talk) 11:19, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Basically, you just have to add an inline citation of Ref 3 right after the hook fact in the article. Also, a QPQ review from you is required, since you now have 7 DYK credits (over the 5 which would have granted you exemption). Everything else looks great and afterwards, I'll be more than happy to give a green tick to your nom. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 11:24, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

GA userbox

I made a GA userbox at User:Brambleberry of RiverClan/GA that would fit our purposes for Ben Revere and any future collaborations. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 15:38, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks! Go Phightins! 19:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

And as for our next collaboration, I was thinking Erik Kratz. There's certainly enough info about him for GA, but his page is a disgrace. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 20:09, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

All right - Kratz sounds like a good idea. After him, we could do a catcher's tour and get Chooch as well. As for Kratz, I believe he was featured in a recent issue of the Phillies program, so I can probably find some good information in there. Go Phightins! 20:21, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 September 2013

In the media: Manning "put back in the closet"; State involvement in Azerbaijani Wikipedia

News and notes: Privacy policy debate gears up

Traffic report: No accounting for the wisdom of crowds

Discussion report: Arbcom election procedures, Wiki Loves Monuments, Privacy policy, FDC, and more

Featured content: Bridging the way to a Peasants' Revolt

WikiProject report: Writing on the frontier: Psychology on Wikipedia

Arbitration report: Manning naming dispute case opens; Tea Party case closes ; Infoboxes nears completion

Technology report: Making Wikipedia more accessible

DeForest Area Public Library

The incoming links were actually added after I re-added'orphan' tag - at that time there were ZERO incoming links, thus my addition of the tag was fully correct. I suggest you check more carefully in future. Regards, Giant Snowman 15:36, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I am not saying you erred in adding the tag, I am just commenting that it is not an orphan at this time. Thank you. Go Phightins! 15:37, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm fully aware of that, hence why I have not re-added the orphan tag. So what exactly was the point of your message to me? Giant Snowman 15:50, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Giant you're simply too fast. When i undid your addition of orphan tags the first time I had other tabs where I was adding the links elsewhere. But you quickly undid my edit before I was able to save them. Should I have undid you after I added the links, yes. However I didn't know you would be so quick, so I'm sorry. Lesson learned on my end. — -dainomite 16:04, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

@Dainomite: - yes, in future it would be best to solve the problem before removing the maintenance tags, to avoid confusion like this in the future. Thanks for the explanation though. Giant Snowman 16:11, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry GS, I think I got caught in between a fast succession of edits. Glad it's figured out. Happy editing to both of you. Go Phightins! 16:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
675	Incheon International Airport (talk)	Add sources
35	Lennox International (talk)	Add sources
28	1994 in baseball (talk)	Add sources
558	Kansas City Royals (talk)	Add sources
14	Scott Moore (baseball) (talk)	Add sources
59	Boeing 737 rudder issues (talk)	Add sources
184	Scott Rolen (talk)	Cleanup
2,135	Cyndi Lauper (talk)	Cleanup
54	2001 Major League Baseball Draft (talk)	Cleanup
495	Lynn Redgrave (talk)	Expand
566	Adly Mansour (talk)	Expand
41	History of the Atlanta Braves (talk)	Expand
348	Designated hitter (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
102	Juan González (baseball) (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
463	Tim Lincecum (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
34	Baseball-Reference.com (talk)	Merge
355	Orange (telecommunications) (talk)	Merge
140	Serfdom in Russia (talk)	Merge
5	1999 Arizona Wildcats football team (talk)	Wikify
11	Ground ball/fly ball ratio (talk)	Wikify
3	1981 Colorado Buffaloes football team (talk)	Wikify
190	VirnetX (talk)	Orphan
1	Apapátaro (talk)	Orphan
1	Al `Arashi (talk)	Orphan
2	George Susce (catcher) (talk)	Stub
71	Mudflap girl (talk)	Stub
5	Mark Bomback (baseball) (talk)	Stub
3	Yorkis Pérez (talk)	Stub
5	Scott Service (talk)	Stub
5	Reggie Harris (talk)	Stub

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions

We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:

Views/Day: Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
Quality: Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:

Content: Is more content needed?
Headings: Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
Images: Is the number of illustrative images about right?
Links: Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
Sources: For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)