User talk:Calvin999

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Serbia-United States relations[edit]

Hi there,

Sorry for the delays on working on the article. I understand if there is a deadline or if I need to go through any procedure again on determining the article's status as a good article. I have been busy and I just get on whenever I have down time, so I am not exactly sure when I will be done with going through with all your recommendations but I will keep getting back to it and hopefully by next week I will have been done. But I'll still get more done today though. Zastavafan76 (talk) 19:20, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

    • Thank you so much for your additional edits! Zastavafan76 (talk) 19:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Norodom Sihanouk[edit]

It's ok--its fine for you to take some time to point out suggestions, as I can only drop by Wiki for short periods of time. So long as the GA doesn't lie dormant for, like half a year without notification, I'm ok :) I've been busy recently anyway.... Mr Tan (talk) 09:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Delayed GA[edit]

It hasn't even been a full 7 days and I haven't been active because I have real-life things to do at times. Both articles are now fixed and touched up. So it should be okay to pass them and such, I have been really slammed and have been full with work. Sparing even a few moments here and there is only something I get to do on my weekends now. Thanks for reviewing and I hope you will pass them now. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:26, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but from my point of view, it went seven days without any acknowledgement from you to say "Okay thanks, bit short of time on Wikipedia at the moment due to real life, I'll do it when I can soon", which would only take a few seconds to do. You have been online in the last seven days and you must have seen the bot messages on your user talk? If you'd have let me know, like someone else did last week whose nomination I was reviewing who was time poor, then I would have left it open for you like I did for him and said "take your time". 19th-26th is seven days. I don't wish to sound harsh or rude. I don't know if I'm supposed to remove failed templates and replace with pass templates. I'll have to ask someone.  — Calvin999 16:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I haven't been on Wikipedia for more then 5 minutes in week prior. I cannot always drop my real life to deal with something Wiki-related. According to the GAN FAQ that holds do not have to be set to 7 days, but I do not ignore reviews. Basically, you did a review and now that I responded shortly thereafter the close, you will not re-open and evaluate it. Aside from the fact that I did not even see it until nearly 4 days in and I had to respond to some Email pester, I'm going to have to renominate and wait possibly months for a continuance. I have long been constrained on my editing time for awhile, but do as you please. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay, but I don't know that unless it's communicated, I'm just following the rules. I put it on hold for 7 days, there was no activity, and the 7 days expired. Before you use that tone with me, I have left at message on the GAN talk page asking what I am allowed to do. Surely you can appreciate that. If you knew that you was going to be busy, you could have always left a note on the nomination template saying you would be busy. Let be this a lesson learnt: notify potential reviewers in the nomination template, or leave a note when a nomination gets opened on the review itself or the reviewers talk page. I took time to review the articles, and I wanted to pass them obviously, and I enjoyed reading them. Don't take it out on me, I just followed procedure.  — Calvin999 16:52, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

barnstar[edit]

Feather Barnstar Hires.png The Feather Barnstar
For many great GA articles. BlueSalix (talk) 20:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you  — Calvin999 20:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Coat of arms - GA Review[edit]

Hi Calvin999, Just read your GA review of Coat of arms and in the main I agree. I do not know if you are going to be involved in any further review of the article, but if you are, there is a point of which you should be aware.
Each country is an authority unto itself and cannot be clumped together to make neater paragraphs. Even within the United Kingdom there are two authorities (which hardly speak to each other). Practices in one are illegal in the other. The same is applicable to North America, one country has a legal authority and the other does not. What we now call Germany was at one time part of the Holy Roman Empire, which comprised upwards of 100 different States each with their own heraldic traditions.
I only mention this, because if the article gets edited to include improper groupings, I and others will change it back to reflect reality. Maybe editors should be steered away from individual authorities and into the things that are the same, rather than the differences.
I fear, though that future editors will soon want to add "And in Sweden they do this ...", or some such. And then all the good work is undone. Best Regards Kiltpin (talk) 10:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Infinity (Mariah Carey song)[edit]

The article Infinity (Mariah Carey song) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Infinity (Mariah Carey song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CurtisNaito -- CurtisNaito (talk) 18:41, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Christmas Time Is in the Air Again[edit]

The article Christmas Time Is in the Air Again you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Christmas Time Is in the Air Again for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CurtisNaito -- CurtisNaito (talk) 18:41, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of One Child (Mariah Carey song)[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article One Child (Mariah Carey song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Magiciandude -- Magiciandude (talk) 01:01, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of One Child (Mariah Carey song)[edit]

The article One Child (Mariah Carey song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:One Child (Mariah Carey song) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Magiciandude -- Magiciandude (talk) 17:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of One Child (Mariah Carey song)[edit]

The article One Child (Mariah Carey song) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:One Child (Mariah Carey song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Magiciandude -- Magiciandude (talk) 18:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Lego GA[edit]

I see that you are reviewing the GA nomination of the Lego article. Just noting that the nominator is a new editor, and while he has made improvements to the article, I am not sure if he understands WP:WIAGA standards. You may want to see Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Bulk reviews and nominations by new editor. Regards, sovereign°sentinel (contribs) 15:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.  — Calvin999 16:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I just want to remind you of the Lego nomination as I noticed you worked on some other nominatons that you picked up after lego. I understand the standards now after my mishap. Thanks Tortle (talk) 21:34, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I also worked on Real-time Transport Protocol and nominated that if you are interested. Tortle (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Reviewer Barnstar Hires.png The Reviewer Barnstar
Thanks for reviewing Cincinnati chili for GA status! valereee (talk) 16:26, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!  — Calvin999 16:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Meteorite (song)[edit]

The article Meteorite (song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Meteorite (song) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 04:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Oh What a Circus/GA2[edit]

(edit conflict) You might wanna take a look into it, I think the person has removed it from your Wikicup submission also. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 04:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)