User talk:Jayzel68/Archive 3

B movie FAR

B movie has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Houston

Please reread this when you get some time. There was one inaccuracy, which I noted, that will be corrected. KP Botany 19:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just wanted folks who voted against it to see if there was anything still outstanding that needed work, but others gave input on the talk page. KP Botany 19:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wesley Clark

Hi Jayzel! Thanks for the heavy copyediting, I removed the cite needed tag as the quotes are cited to Citation #93 (right now), "To Find Party, General Marched to His Own Drummer". I cite it only once as I have [those two quotes] then [Seelye's quote] which are all cited to that article and the two sets of quotes immediately follow one another in the prose here. Hope you'll support the FAC now, thanks! Staxringold _talk^contribs 21:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Al Gore talk page

I've asked Jiffypopmetaltop to stop editing your comments on the Al Gore talk page, and he has agreed. While understandable, please don't resort to the same level in response. Thanks, —Doug Bell ^talk 00:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, "jiffy" is a sockpuppet of that old pain "jasper23." He should be banned but he has an admin (Willbeback) in his pocket. Eagermonth 04:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for copyediting

Dear Jayzel68

I noticed that you are a member of the league of copyeditors. In case you are interested: Would you please copyedit Darius Mehrjui? I expanded the article and it needs copyediting for grammar, tone and style. Any helps will be very much appreciated. Thanks.Sangak 19:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time. I understand you. Just relax and forget about wikipedia all together for some time! Take care.Sangak 07:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Daughter articles

(also posted here but minor expansion for you)

Jayzel, one reason the George W. Bush substance abuse controversy article was created was because a number of editors (myself in particular) spent 4 months arguing to keep it out of the GWB article. After a "vote" the majority of editors compromised to create the daughter article...so some of the articles you mention are actually cut from the main GWB article either due to a need to follow summary style or to have a place to expand on the precise issues. There is also the George Bush military service controversy...we can't forget that one! I suppose once Bush is no longer President, some of those who really hate him will find better things to do with their time. But for the record, the current GWB article is a far cry better than it was a couple years ago...not that this is any comfort to you. Best wishes.--MONGO 11:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also...don't miss:

Thanks!

I just wanted to say thanks for participating in Wesley Clark's FAC, the article was just promoted! Staxringold _talk^contribs 14:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ZD Net

Hello, why are you saying that the ZDNET article is a dupe citation ? Arcticdawg 02:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dupe lead?

Your removal of content there was rather surprising. The fact that he claimed doctoral degrees and a professorship should be in that first sentence. The subsequent paragraphs the spell out his denial of it just looks funny when all of the sudden we read a denial about teaching and there wasn't a mention of it prior. (→Netscott) 01:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]