This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Ruhrfisch/Archive 31

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Peer reviews having minimal or no feedback at all:
June 28Rotating locomotion in living systems
May 1List of United States Senators from Ohio
If your review is not present in the main unanswered list, add it here.
view listupdate

Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a message below and I will generally reply on your talk page. Although my email address is enabled, it is not an address I check often (so I may be slow in replying to email and very much prefer to have conversations here). Please also note that while I am glad to do a peer review on just about any article, I do not usually have the time to do copyedits (sorry). Thanks for stopping by and happy editing! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Contents

great...

...sig, sayed the speaking pumpkin to the chinchillas 718smiley.svg-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 19:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Bring Us Together

Is up at FAC [Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bring Us Together/archive1 here].--Wehwalt (talk) 03:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

The Story of Miss Moppet

I'm sending this to FA with one new short section at the end "Merchandise" and a few new images. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 05:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Juwan Howard/archive2

Why is the title redlinked here?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Okmulgee and UPBSP

I did see it. I am down to three states left Louisiana, West Virginia and Hawaii. After that I think I am going to start in Maine and work my way south and west and clear all the state park red links, getting as many DYKs as possible. The kitty is still missing. ={ Dincher (talk) 23:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

File:UPBSP Flow.jpg another great Nicholas T pic. I will let you decide where to place it.
He's a skinny one. File:White pines, Varden Conservation Area.jpg. Dincher (talk) 03:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Dispatches

Hi. I was going through the suggestions at WP:FCDW and I came across your story. From the looks of it you and Finetooth started it and never finished. I contacted you way back in August, but nothing really happened. The page seems pretty complete; I modernized the templates, added to the summary, and added related links. I think it's more or less ready for the pipe; do you have anything to add to it? =) Regards, ResMar 23:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

New article

Hello again Ruhrfish. Thanks once again for the reviews you did for Christchurch, Dorset which I am still working hard on to get up to GA standard. Because it has started to become a bloated, I have decided to move some of the information into newly created, seperate articles. I have an unreviewed article User:Ykraps/Landmarks of Christchurch, Dorset at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 October 4 and hoped you might have time to review it there. If not, don't worry, you look like a busy person and have done quite a lot for me already. Regards--Ykraps (talk) 09:13, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I have acknowledged your feedback and left comments at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 October 4. Regards--Ykraps (talk) 12:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Magnum Rolle peer review

Would you mind reviewing Magnum Rolle at Wikipedia:Peer review/Magnum Rolle/archive1? I have worked hard on this article and want to bring it to featured status! ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 22:37, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Gymnophyllum wardi

RlevseTalk 00:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the hook! The cat is back! and congrats on another DYK. Dincher (talk) 00:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Yup! Double Deam Team. Dincher (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Juwan Howard/archive2

Can you close Wikipedia:Peer review/Juwan Howard/archive2. I am nominating this at FAC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive2

As a reviewer at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tim Duncan, I thought you might consider commenting at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Dispatch

Looks highly polished and comprehensive to me. I made an additional half-dozen minor changes, as you will see. I thought "out-of-universe" might not be clear to everyone and changed it to "real-world" and also added a link to WP:MOSFICT. I added a couple of nbsp examples, and I forget what else, not much in any case. Feel free to edit my edits. Finetooth (talk) 20:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

  • There is a bit of redundancy in the linking and the examples, but I don't see that as a problem. Finetooth (talk) 21:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
What exactly did you otherwise intend to write? I would love the hear it. By the time of my involvement with the September 6 Dispatch (which came out much longer then I thought it would, and took a lot of arguing to go through), the section had been dead for over half a year. So basically, I want to revive it =) ResMar 00:10, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
I am done with the Dispatch and I believe that Finetooth is too. I do not have any other firm ideas for Dispatches. I have a bunch of articles I want to get written or get to FA, but I imagine you are not asking about those (and I am pretty busy in real life, so I am not getting much done beyond PRs and FAC reviews lately). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:35, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Me neither, unfortunately. With the summer over I have to pell away at school again...what a pain. ResMar 01:33, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Farthest South

As per your suggestion, see the discussioned opened at Talk:Farthest South. Your thoughts on the matter will be appreciated. Cheers. Catiline63 (talk) 17:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Please watch...

Please watch List of Kent State University alumni. An anonymous editor has repeatedly tried to add a non-notable local radio host 4 times in the last 2 days (his only 4 edits thus far on Wikipedia), so the list may need a brief period of protection. --JonRidinger (talk) 19:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/1997 Michigan Wolverines football team/archive2

The bot has closed Wikipedia:Peer review/1997 Michigan Wolverines football team/archive2, i think due to FAC recency. I don't think this rule has ever been enforced. E.G. two months ago at Millennium Park a PR was allowed. Even if the rule is enforced, this article was withdrawn rather than failed. Any chance the bot action can be undone for a withdrawn rather than failed article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:48, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

TTT, you may be misunderstanding "withdrawn" vs. "archived"; a withdrawal with significant opposes is no different than an archival. A withdraw with no opposes is not archived. Michigan Wolverines was archived with significant opposes.[1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Well. I withdrew based on two opposes without substantive issues and Yellowmonkees oppose which only had the outstanding issue of a request for a section that the two other college football team season don't have. Not sure on consensus on that issue, but will see what I can find. I must have eced with the final oppose because I never saw it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:25, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
1) The bot checks once a day to see if any PRs are also listed at FAC or FLC. If they are, it closes the PR, which is what happened here. 2) The wording at the top of the PR page is just: Articles must be free of major cleanup banners and 14 days must have passed since any previous peer review or unsuccessful FAC. Notice it makes no distinction between a FAC that has been archived by the director or one of his delegates, or one that is withdrawn or otherwise closed without reaching FA. This is explained in a bit more detail at Wikipedia:Peer review/Request removal policy. While it is true that PR has ignored this rule in the past, it has typically been for FACs that were essentially speedy closes and got little or no feedback beyond "not ready for FAC". I see this as not in that category. There have also been a few PRs opened right after an unsuccessful FAC that were simply not picked up on (i.e. no one noticed). These typically slip through when the backlog is large, as happens to be the case right now.
Please note that there is no restriction from soliciting comments on the article's talk page, which would have the same effect as a formal PR.
There are four people who typically review most of the PR backlog items. Brianboulton is doing most of the source checks at FAC and is thus not able to contribute as much to PR. Jappalang is also in great demand as an image reviewer. Finetooth is currently busy in real life and thus not able to do as many reviews as normal. I am also quite busy in real life, and am painfully aware that I have at least three PRs where I have already said I will make comments, plus I have promised to look at your Juwan Howard FAC (and FAC's where I have not already done a PR typically take me as much time as several normal PRs, plus I am not as comfortable reviewing sports articles). I normally like to split my time about equally between writing articles and reviewing them, but lately I have been doing almost all reviews. So Tony, if you want to ask on Wikipedia talk:Peer review about this being an exception, feel free to do so. I am not sure what the consensus would be, but I know where my !vote would lie. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:42, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Image question

Hi -- I know you do some image reviews at FAC, and I was wondering if you could take a look at something for me. I have two fair use images in an article I'm working on, Venture Science Fiction; the images are the July 1958 cover and the August 1970 cover. I haven't done a fair use image at FAC in a very long time and I suspect the rules have changed; can you tell me if these would or could pass muster? I see you're busy, so if you've no time to look at this, no problem. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 17:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much; that's very helpful. I don't know if I have sources that can provide what you suggest, but it's certainly worth looking for. I really appreciate you taking the time to look. (And I plan to take F&SF to FAC one of these days, too.) Mike Christie (talk) 01:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I have an Asimov postcard too! I have my own list of famous sf people I've met, as I imagine most sf readers do -- dinner with Mike Moorcock, going to a bookstore with Kim Stanley Robinson ... I went to Clarion a long time ago, in 1989, and that led to meeting several great writers, including Damon Knight and Kate Wilhelm. Still have the t-shirt! Mike Christie (talk) 02:07, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Well, the rarefied air didn't do me much good -- I wanted to be an sf writer and never managed to get far on that road, though I did get one story published. I still collect the magazines though -- I have over 4,000 sf magazines in the basement, which is one reason why I write all these magazine sf articles. Mike Christie (talk) 02:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

State park on main page

Are you interested in getting one of the state parks as a TFA sometime this fall? I don't have a particular one in mind. It's just a thought. Might be nice for fall and all the fall colors. Perhaps Leonard Harrison State Park or Colton Point State Park? Dincher (talk) 19:53, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I know that it's cutting it close, but I think that having one on the main page this month would be best when thinking of the leaves. But if needed I have no problems waiting until later. What do you think? Dincher (talk) 21:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. I just really like the idea of having an article on the main page in autumn. Dincher (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Now we wait. Dincher (talk) 01:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Didn't wait long, did we? Dincher (talk) 22:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I think that the images are fine as is. I just uploaded a new pic of Forksville Covered Bridge not sure where you want it. Do we really need to add alt text? I hate alt text! Dincher (talk) 00:11, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I thought you might run into the same problem with the bridge. It's a tough call. I do like the inclusion of the store. Initially I thought it would be good for the infobox, but then you'd have two nearly duplicate pictures of the bridge, just one with and one without the store. I also wanted to encourage you to do one of your bridge or creek articles soon, for yourself. It might be a nice break from Peer Reviews and other wiki topics we've touched on off line. I start with the alt texts from the bottom of the article and work my way up. We'll get it done quicker. I have the time to do some tonight. Dincher (talk) 20:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes it would. Might I suggest Upper Pine Bottom Run or Rapid Run (Union County)? Dincher (talk) 03:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I just wrote Alvan Macauley. Could you look up his obit for me? I have a hook for it on User:Dincher/Sandbox. What do you think? I see you did the alt texts, couldn't help yourelf could you ;) Dincher (talk) 01:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Two states to go! Dincher (talk) 03:00, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Another obit request, Jean Charles Faget died December 7, 1884 in New Orleans. Dincher (talk) 00:10, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Ykraps/Landmarks of Christchurch, Dorset (list)

I have acknowledged your feedback and left comments at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 October 4. Thanks Ykraps (talk) 07:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

The Judd School

Thats great news - how did it get that? Tom (talk) 18:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

+1 Barnstar

Editors Barnstar.png The Editor's Barnstar
For all your all your contributions in writing and reviewing articles, I award you this barnstar. Quadzilla99 (talk) 18:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

GAN question

Hello again! I have two things: 1st, on GAN, I recently evaluated and failed University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The very next day (yesterday) it was renominated for GAN by the same editor even though none of the issues were addressed. My question is, should I simply quick fail it again (it has a citation style tag on the references section among other problems from before), or should I remove the nomination? I didn't see a time limit on renominating, but one day later with no big changes? Just seems like he's trying to get a more lenient editor (I'm pretty lenient as it is!) rather than an actual improvement. That article and another the same editor nominated (which I also had to fail) are my first ventures into GAN rating, so I'm not totally sure.

Second, I recently got Theodore Roosevelt High School (Kent, Ohio) promoted to GA. When you have a chance, if you could look over it and give me an idea what you think needs to be done to get it ready for FAC, I would much appreciate it. Secondary school articles are more difficult because there are hardly any FAs to base them off of and even then, some of the FAs were promoted quite awhile ago. If I learned anything from the FAC for the Kent article, it was that using a 2006 FA standard won't work in 2010. Thanks as always for your time!! --JonRidinger (talk) 15:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I put together a Peer Review...something I've never done. It can be found at Wikipedia:Peer review/Theodore Roosevelt High School (Kent, Ohio)/archive1. About the only thing I can see for sure I'd like to do is convert the alumni list into prose, though it's small enough that it probably wouldn't be required. I'm sure there will be some content and excess detail questions as well. The one thing that is different about it versus other FAs is that there are hardly any FAs of American public high schools. While the structure is similar (I grouped things together like including traditions in with the programs they are part of), there are definitely differences in what is emphasized and what isn't. --JonRidinger (talk) 16:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
I responded at Wikipedia:Peer review/Theodore Roosevelt High School (Kent, Ohio)/archive1. Most of your suggestions I liked and used. I had a few questions there, mostly about the level of detail and the references. Thanks for taking the time to do this! Feel free to respond when totally convenient. I am in no rush! --JonRidinger (talk) 04:05, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The article Leonard Harrison State Park is schedule to appear as the main page featured article in the near future

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on October 19, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 19, 2010. If you think that it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! TbhotchTalk C. 19:14, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I've been so busy IRL that I forgot all about this! Dincher (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
My hard drive is my long term memory. Short term memory is stored on floppy disks. ;-) Dincher (talk) 22:54, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

There was just an edit on Leonard Harrison that needs to be deleted ASAP. It's the one reverted by DashVbot. Dincher (talk) 21:41, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you think that it's a good move to add Pennsylvania|Portal to some articles? I am doing it as a time killer, will stop if it's not of use. Dincher (talk) 23:31, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
More nastiness. Editor is John Stamos vs Piccolo. Dincher (talk) 00:01, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed that Lenny and Larry were TFAs exactly three years apart! Dincher (talk) 01:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I was surprised to see Lenny the man get that many. Good news all around! Dincher (talk) 03:22, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

RE: request

Thanks for the heads up - I like the notice. We requested the TFA via TFA/R, so it is not a surprise, and we have already added ALT text and done some minor cleanup, but I like the idea of the notice. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:33, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Since this incident it's better prepared to avoid them. TbhotchTalk C. 19:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I made one of the maps in that article and knew of the scheduling incident. By the way, I noticed a typo in the header of the notice, it should be "is scheduled": The article Leonard Harrison State Park is schedule[d] to appear as the main page featured article in the near future. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:42, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
No, thanks to you for that typo. I corrected it for further notifications. :D TbhotchTalk C. 19:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

More TFA stuff

I was pleased (and a little bit alarmed) to see that Robert Falcon Scott is to be TFA on 24 October. The alarm arises from the high level of attention and vandalism that this article has always attracted. More specifically, I am in France from 22 to 26 October and won't be able to watch the article during is 24 hours in the spotlight. I know that there will be vigilance, but the article will undoubtedly be attacked and some damage may be difficult to detect. You have some knowledge of this article's history; I wonder if on my behalf you could keep an eye on it? It isn't the vandalism that worries me as much as the often well-meaning but semi-informed editors who want to get their POV on to the page.

My absence means I won't be able to update the PR backlog after 21 October, until 26th. Sorry about that. I also have an article on PR (Talbot Baines Reed, a new departure - neither opera singer nor explorer), and any comments on that will be much appreciated, but only when you have time. It seems I am often asking you to do things for me; please let me know if I can do anything in return. I am pleased to see that one of your noms is also going to be TFA. Brianboulton (talk) 23:59, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Both personally and on behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your fantastic editing. Please post these on your user page:

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Can you find coords?

I just went through all of the Pennsylvania NR lists to add coords for those few sites that were missing, and the only one that I couldn't find was for the Delaware and Hudson Canal. Could you find separate coords for the canal in Pike and Wayne counties? Nyttend (talk) 03:23, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I actually tried the aqueduct already, but I can't find where the canal itself is on the southwestern bank of the river there; the only thing that I thought might be it was a railroad line. Nyttend (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, thanks very much! I really didn't know what to do, especially because (as far as I could see) there wasn't anything of the canal left on the Pennsylvania side; the map on the canal article made me think that it was all in New York, and I knew that I couldn't see anything as substantial, say, as this piece of the Miami and Erie Canal in western Ohio. Nyttend (talk) 01:16, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Crittenden

I am indeed watching the review page, and I appreciate your comments. I'll try to address them before my daughter is scheduled to arrive on Friday. Everything I can respond to now is one less thing to worry about at FAC. Thanks. BTW, nice chinchilla picture. :) Acdixon (talk contribs count) 18:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind comments. I'll be pleased to let you know when I nominate the Crittenden article at FAC, as I'm too well aware of the slow pace of reviews there. I've had articles that failed multiple FACs for no other reason than lack of comments. As Kentucky governors don't generate much interest, it's tough to get good reviews. Hopefully, Governors of Kentucky will be a good topic within a month or two (still awaiting two GA reviews so I can nominate the topic). Not sure whether I'll bring Crittenden or Governor of Kentucky to FAC first, but they'll both end up there eventually. Acdixon (talk contribs count) 01:12, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Dash script

Just saw your note about the script. Yes, I have it, and I'd be glad to run it any time even though it's no longer needed in this case. I'm still only 10 percent wiki-functional because of travel. Should be back to normal soon. Finetooth (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for Scott etc

I am back from my Paris jaunt and can resume my PR backlog duties (I see it has grown somewhat in my absence!). Thank you for looking after Scott on its TFA day; it doesn't look as though it was attacked as much as I had feared, but your efforts plus those of Sandy, Dincher and others kept it tidy.

Thank you also for your review comments on Talbot Baines Reed, which I have addressed. I am giving the article a final prose check today, and will probably nominate for FAC either later today or tomorrow - I'll let you know. Brianboulton (talk) 11:00, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I have now nominated Reed at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 18:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Photo

Please call me at 717-566-3251 or email me at news@thesunontheweb.com concerning one of your Commons photos (Marcellus_Shale_Gas_Drilling_Tower_1.jpg). Thanks! Dave —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbuffington (talkcontribs) 15:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Petitcodiac River

Hey, I'd like to thank you again for reviewing this article last month at FAC, and I would like to inform you that I've addressed your concerns and re-nominated it. I would highly appreciate if you gave final remarks at the new nomination, as you are already familiar with the subject matter (and rivers). Thanks! EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:15, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

If you had other concerns for this FAC, could you post them on the talk page? Today would be a perfect day for me to fix them. Thanks. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:20, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
The area and length have been resolved. We still cannot verify if the map is completely accurate, but its copyright status is fine. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 00:43, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Morrison Hershfield page

Hey Ruhrfisch,

Thank you for taking the time to look over the page, I appreciate the feedback you have provided me with. I stuck to recent awards and notable projects as it is tough to find credible 3rd party references for much older projects and awards. If I were to post some of the older projects that do not have these references I am sure they would be eventually be tagged by an editor saying reference needed, so that is an issue I am currently having. I still have more content to add to the page, I more so wanted to see how other editors felt about the page before I went any further with it. I will take all of your suggestions into consideration before making any more edits to the page. Thanks Again, Joe Fielder (talk) 12:22, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

The Howard Stern Show fine history

Many thanks for reviewing the article. Definitely a help! LowSelfEstidle (talk) 12:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

It's raining thanks spam!

  • Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
  • There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
  • If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks • Ling.Nut (talk) 02:30, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Social model of disability/archive1

Thanks for doing the review. I'm a total newbie at the review and article rating process, so please excuse my dumb questions: What is the next step after all your reccommentations have been followed? Can any editor upgrade the article rating or is there another process to get a B or higher quality rating? In your opinion, if all the improvements you advised are completed, what rating would the article qualify for? Roger (talk) 20:45, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

The Story of Miss Moppet

Oh my goodness! I didn't know I was so honored until you wrote! I'm thrilled! I couldn't be more pleased! And I think you should share the gold star. I'll drop a line to the deputies asking for a gold star to be sent your way. I may not have received that star without your calm and assured guidance along the way! I'm very, very grateful for all your insight, strength, and clear vision through the process. I'm thrilled, I'm delighted! It's so encouraging to have a Featured Article acknowledgement! It makes me want to do better and better! Susanne2009NYC (talk) 00:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

PEFO to FAC

I nominated Petrified Forest National Park at FAC just now. Thought you would like to know. Finetooth (talk) 02:32, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Shawnee National Forest

I didn't add that link, I just reformatted it. AdamNewcomb (talk) 00:27, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Cook Forest and Quehanna

Thanks. I got to watch the first part of the game and came to work in a bad mood. Things improved. :) I can't see the image, but I trust your judgement. I am very busy with ECU and not so much here. One class is going very well. The technology class is a challenge. Dincher (talk) 21:58, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Yup. Go fir it. ;) Dincher (talk) 22:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I replaced an image. They all look very good. Thanks for the encouragement. I am uplifted by the words of a co-worker at school who took the same course and said that it was rough for her too and that her grades were terrible, but in the end she got an "A." Dincher (talk) 23:03, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Did you see NicholasT's latest contributions? Some wonderful shots of Quehanna Wild Area including a very amusing picture of Wildcat Rock. How's wikilife going? I have stepped back from DYK for awhile. Things to be in a big uproar over there and I have no interest in getting involved. I am sorry that things are bad, but I am staying out. I've been doing category work, but other than watching my watch list nothing else. I am still Hawaii away from all 50 states in DYK, but there's no hurry. Dincher (talk) 01:21, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Buttonwood Covered Bridge from US15.jpg Is my favorite. It's a different perspective. Yeah, he uploads stuff and then deletes it sometimes. It's usually stuff that's not what you'd call his best work. I imagine he has loads of pics that never see flickr. Dincher (talk) 04:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I voted. Still very busy IRL. Dincher (talk) 23:27, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

PR backlog

I added TEN yesterday; that's actually two days' worth, as I was unwell the previous day and unable to do the usual update. I will try and get stuck in to PR this week, provided that my FAC chores don't escalate. Ealdgyth isn't doing sources reviews any more, and it's just as well that FAC is relatively quiet at present - not much movement in or out. Brianboulton (talk) 10:46, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Enugu

Sure, I'll have a look at it tonight. Not sure if it is comprehensive enough for FA yet though..♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Have to be tomorrow, hope this is OK. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:38, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Could you look at Monadnock Building?

I have been working on Monadnock Building, a Chicago Landmark and NRHP/NHL, for a while now. I am hoping to take it to FAC soon, and I have listed it at PR for feedback. I'd be grateful if you could take a look and share any suggestions. Many thanks. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 04:09, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Moving forward on IP certification

Please see Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates#Suggestion; momentum seems to have stalled at WT:FAC. My idea is to create a page that would be useful across all content review processes, and where we would have a centralized registry so we don't have to clutter each nomination with the same questions to repeat nominators. I'm not sure how we would name the page, so I've put it in my userspace for now-- feel free to edit. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Harris TFA

Is 14K good? It is no where near the leaderboard: Wikipedia:TFASTATS--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:39, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

European union

Thank you very much for the peer review you made, I will reply in it when all will be improved, you can also watch my current replies to single points of your suggestions, I agree with you that the article is far from being FA yet but we can still improve it Petrb (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the congrats and the heads-up. You saw the star before I did. Thanks also for doing the copyvio, plagiarism, and close-paraphrasing checks. They are a good idea, especially in light of the recent incident. Finetooth (talk) 02:40, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I added the link to Sandy's page to my Desk page, and I'll try to do more formal spot checks for violations during PR and other reviews. The close paraphrases are a bit harder to detect than the other two without a close look at the sources. By the way, thanks also for your support during the FAC, your helpful suggestions, and the image review. I didn't mention it during the FAC, but that was the first inset map I'd ever attempted; I used your inset map for Jordan River (Utah) as a model. Finetooth (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Boldly changing Miss Moppet

Hi Ruhrfisch - I hope you don't mind, but I've put your version of the Redfield analysis into The Story of Miss Moppet for now. I think it's an accurate summarization of the essay, and perhaps better than what's in place at the moment. It can always be tweaked if necessary. I do have background in children's literature, so can help Susanne if necessary, though am fairly busy at the moment. Thought I'd let you know. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:46, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I think we're almost there, don't you? I'm a little busy workwise for the next few days, but will be popping in and out, just so you know. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Albany Pine Bush peer review

Thanks for the review. I may not get to all this for a couple of weeks, but I just wanted to let you know that I agree with all your points, and I will address them. I don't know if you want to close the review manually, but you can now.
--Gyrobo (talk) 02:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Ping

Hi, I've emailed you. Tony (talk) 14:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I've emailed again to say it's ready for you ... over the next 24 or 36 hours or so? Thx. Tony (talk) 13:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Watch TRHS page

I think you have the Theodore Roosevelt High School (Kent, Ohio) page on your watchlist already, but in case not, it may be in need of protection. I have two editors who are trying to insert changes and are insistent. One is trying to "update" the enrollment "since he won't finish" and the other "didn't know what razed meant" so he keeps trying to replace it with "destroyed" or "removed". I have already hit 3RR and he likely has now. Thanks --JonRidinger (talk) 04:45, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Jon thanks for giving Ruhrfisch a heads up here. Ruhrfisch I am unsure as to why you have posted a 3RR warning on my talk page as I have not gone over it and you did not post any thing on Jons page. Do you favor editors over others? Also I wanted to get your opinon on whether the word demolished would pass WP:FAC as always thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwerty5225 (talkcontribs) 04:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Note I stated above that I already hit 3RR. No need to warn me if I already know. Second, both demolished and razed are acceptable terms and either would be OK on FAC. The problem here is changing it because you weren't familiar with the word when it is clearly a commonly used word as shown by the link to the city of Kent's website. Rather than change it, look it up and increase your vocabulary. The only time I replace words is if the word is slang (slang is not encyclopedic), is a localism (something that only people from a particular area understand), or it is a more common term in, say, British English than American English (like using the term "carriageway" in an article about a U.S. Highway). --JonRidinger (talk) 05:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey tahnks for the RR reminder I was under the impression that Revert ment to switch back to the previous version which I had done only 3 times but after reading the document you posted on my page I realize that the first change counts as a revert for some reason. I appreciate you reminding me on this issue as I have been out of the edditing loop for quite some time now but I am excited to get back into it. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwerty5225 (talkcontribs) 05:25, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Part 2

If you could have a look over the latest discussion regarding the enrollment (the necessity of using a citation for the number in the infobox itself) and the "as of" parameter (using "2009-10" instead of "2010") and offer any insights, I would appreciate it. Some took place on my talk page as well. I have already exhausted my 3RR again and this is definitely a matter of preference. The difference here is the other editor is an experienced editor. I'd definitely like to see some additional thoughts, though part of me is wondering why this has even become an issue. --JonRidinger (talk) 05:19, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Adding Older Projects to Morrison Hershfield

Hey Ruhrfisch,

Sorry for the late response been busy with other projects. If I were to add older projects and awards to this wikipage would these webpages be allowed to be referenced http://www.morrisonhershfield.com/aboutus/Pages/OurHistory.aspx and http://www.morrisonhershfield.com/newsroom/Awards/Pages/Awards.aspx. My thought is just when other editors see these pages as references they will consider it a conflict of interest. Your thoughts and opinions are much appreciated. Thanks Joe Fielder (talk) 14:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Email

Just so you know, I sent you email re Miss Moppet. Usually I get confirmation, but haven't, so don't know whether it was sent, or whether my email is still disabled. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 03:30, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Sentence spacing article

Hello again. I'd like to ask your advice about the Sentence spacing article. I've been at Wikipedia for a little while now, but I'm a relative toddler compared to some users such as yourself. I'd value your advice.
A new IP user came to the "Sentence spacing" article a couple of weeks ago and has clearly (at least in my opinion) fallen victim to WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and outwardly (again, IMO) seems to be using Talk:Sentence spacing as his soapbox.
I have two views on this:
1. I don't mind hard questions about the article, even critical ones. The IP user noted some minor errors (e.g., p. 56 vs. p. 57 on a reference, some years that needed correcting, etc.), and has brought up further discussion regarding some new points. Of course, the article isn't "final", so I cannot complain about comments such as these that improve the article. Unfortunately, my suggestions to the user to use his/her obvious interest in the matter to investigate some of the knowledge gaps in the article (as noted in the FAQ) have been ignored. He/she prefers to continue to find fault in the current FA.
2. It's getting rather tedious at this point. At first, I didn't mind pointing out relevant WP policies because the user was new. Also, the user continues to voice objections that were raised by editors in the FAC pages (and the user read the FAC pages)—such as POV assertions for the entire article and an assertion that the article is unbalanced—and were resolved before the article became an FA.
The user has also taken to selectively move, or delete certain of my comments, and continues to do so—even after my objection. This is a bit of an aside from the above though, and I hope it can be resolved between the user and me.
Other than the comment editing/moving/deleting, I don't know if this matter can even be addressed. If this continues for, say, the next month or so, are there any recourses? Thanks. --Airborne84 (talk) 18:38, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
He certainly had enough to say, the IP did. I tried to point him in the right direction, but I do not know if he has merit on his side.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello Ruhrfisch. Since you are an admin can you address the deletion of my comments at Talk:Sentence spacing? This diff is the second deletion of the same passages from one of my comments, after I asked the IP user noted above to stop deleting and moving selected portions of my comments (we apparently disagree about whether they are off-topic). He/she said that the first deletion of these passages was because they were off-topic. I disagreed and reinstated my comments, inviting him/her to further discuss the matter on my talk page if he/she desired. The second deletion had the edit summary "reference to living persons." I know references to living persons have to be handled with care, especially on articles about them, but I don't see anything precluding my use in this instance. Also, these passages are simply pasted text that the IP user him/herself posted in an earlier thread. I'm not sure why it's on-topic and fine when he/she posts it, but it's off topic and not allowed when I re-post it.
However, if I'm the one out of line here, please let me know. This is my first time dealing with this type of situation. Thanks. --Airborne84 (talk) 03:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing the issue of comment deletions. I thought that, as an administrator, the wording of your other passage in your first comment was well chosen. It addressed the situation at the talk page without implying that the article cannot be improved—which would certainly be antithetical to one of the key ideas here at Wikipedia. --Airborne84 (talk) 19:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Peer Review

In the peer review you provided for History of hip-hop dance, you mentioned plagiarism as your first concern. That's a big deal. Can you please give examples of this in the article. I feel like a bullet point this serious should be given with examples. What did you read in the article that made you feel this way? //Gbern3 (talk) 21:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I feel better now. // Gbern3 (talk) 15:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Ricketts Glen

I saw a picture of the nastiness on some hemlocks and a sign at RGSP. I hadn't seen anything about him hiking the glen. That's great news. We might as well have a vote again! Dincher (talk) 02:00, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I just commented on the photo in question offering my enthusiasm. Dincher (talk) 03:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Nastiness on Joe Paterno. Dincher (talk) 03:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I am looking forward to them too. I am kind of surprised he's doing it. Most of his work is well off the beaten path and the trail at RGSP is very beaten. Dincher (talk) 00:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

A consideration for cross project consolidation of talk page templates

I have started a conversation here about the possibility of combining some of the United States related WikiProject Banners into {{WikiProject United States}}. From out conversation before you seemed like you thought it might be a good idea for the counties WikiProject. I am going to contact some of the other members of the project as you suggested but I thought I would start here. If you have any comments, questions or suggestions please take a moment and let me know. --

response from RB cross posted from User_talk:66.217.117.133

Ruhrfisch,

Hi, I am a software engineer with an engineering degree in computer science.  I have more than 20 years of programming experience which includes experience with factoring.

I have signed my posts with the initials RB from the beginning, 16 November 2010.

This warning is a misunderstanding since I was editing my own comment and for carefully considered reasons.

  1. The deleted material is off topic, which does not follow WP:TALK.
  2. The on-topic content did not change.
  3. The deleted material references a living person, as well as the opinions of the talk editors about the living person.
  4. The deleted material is in the context of a potential legal liability for Wikipedia, where an editor implied that the content of the discussion meant that the author of a web site had done something "wrong or illegal".
  5. Airborne84 has copied the quote about the living person into a discussion about an editor's personal definition of "embarrassing", thus drawing attention to the off-topic content and the editor.  Deleting this content helps resolve that situation.

Please revert this warning.

I'm not sure what more you want to know.  I come in on a modem so the last octet in the IP address frequently changes.  I believe that the number in the next to last octet can be either 116, 117, or 118.  For example: (66.217.117.133) (66.217.118.135)

I see that airborne84 is escalating on your talk page.  I'm sorry that someone else's time has to be spent on this, but thanks for your involvement.  Perhaps there is a better place for me to respond than on your talk page.  Please let me know.

Also, please note that since my IP address changes, this is not really my talk page.
Thanks,
RB  66.217.117.133 (talk) 05:16, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

RB  66.217.117.133 (talk) 07:38, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch,
Update, I see that there are not just one, but two edits in the diff file you sent.  I apologize that my initial response only references the first of the two revisions listed in the diff.  I will not further respond now, but will await your response as to where this goes.  Thanks,
RB  66.217.117.107 (talk) 09:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm interested in moving on too, but I also am aware that the current status is not at a stopping point.  Are you willing to note under the "Documented Removals" subsection that you have not issued a statement about Diff#5?  I have stated that I think Diff#5 is in accordance with policy and that I need to make my case.  It is possible that you have policy concerns with Diff#5, and you might choose at some later point to prepare a statement.  That would be a stopping point.  Thanks,
RB  66.217.117.27 (talk) 07:57, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I already said I was done with the Documented Removals section so discussion at the Talk:Sentence spacing page about the article could move on. If you want me to reply there, please say so. Sorry I missed it before - I looked for removals and missed that you put the things you removed elsewhere. My experience on Wikipedia is that editors only move whole comments (not just parts), and that the kinds of things you moved would not normally be refactored. My suggestion is not to refactor like this. If you really feel something is off topic, I would ask permission to refactor first and only move things after the others involved in the discussion agreed. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:42, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
PS I just added a link to clarify things above - such edits are allowed. ;-) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:45, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The new commentary about Diff#5 by the admin is a constructive refusal of my compromise proposal.  I await the admin's clarification as to what it means to him to "move on".  RB  66.217.117.171 (talk) 20:23, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  1. You have been warned about refactoring other people's comments on article talk pages in the manner which you chose to refactor comments at Talk:Sentence spacing. My opinion and the opinion of everyone else who weighed in there except you is that this is not the way refactoring is done on Wikipedia. By selectively removing only portions of comments and posting them elsewhere out of context, you have changed the intended meaning of the original poster's comments. Since you seem to have a different understanding of refactoring, my very strong suggestion is just not to do it. If you still feel it would be a good idea, ask the other person(s) first (the people whose comments you want to move). If they agree, it is fine. If they do not agree, move on. If you want an example of when I think refactoring would be a good idea, please ask.
  2. You seem to be under the impression that you can be blocked or somehow punished for what you have already done. Please let me assure you that I will not block you for what you have already done, and I do not believe any reasonable admin would. However, since you have been warned about refactoring in a way contrary to Wikipedia guidelines and practice, you are expected not to repeat that behavior in the future. If you do, then you might be blocked or the article might be protected in such a way that IP address and newly registered users cannot edit it.
  3. Just as an aside, it seems pretty clear to me that you have strong opinions about the need to always put two spaces after terminal punctuation (for one thing, you add an extra non-breaking space after all your sentences to force the software to do this here). Please read WP:NPOV - any article should have a neutral point of view, and ideally someone who has read an article should have no idea of the opinion of the authors on the subject. Please also note that articles are to reflect modern reliable sources on their topic and that the amount of coverage of topics in an article should reflect the amount in the literature - please see WP:V, WP:RS and WP:Weight
  4. As for what moving on means to me, I think we should discuss the article and how to improve it. As I have said before, you have said on its talk page that the Sentence spacing "Article is not good for Wikipedia's reputation" and on the WP:RS/N that "Let me add that I think the page should not be at FA level." here. While I do not agree with your opinions, I would very much like to see your evidence that the article fails to meet WP:Featured article criteria, and any other problems you see with it. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:30, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I thank the admin for clearing the air enough that I can begin to respond.  This is now ten days of new administrative findings and warnings.  During this time I have been listening rather than reacting.  Twice I have made proposals that would have ended the stream of new findings, but they were refused.  I find that it chills the atmosphere that the admin would declare without explanation that there was "evident dislike" on my part.  Is this the admin's best effort at building consensus?  Regarding the new finding in the last post that I have "changed meaning," I believe that Diff#5 is good workmanship.  If I moved comments "out of context", why did I label them as "off-topic" when I moved them?  Why did I label where each of the sections came from and why I moved them? 
  1. Refactoring is in the letter of the guidelines.
  2. The refactoring improved Wikipedia, so was in the spirit of the guidelines. (A relevant counterargument I have heard is that refactoring complicates life for DR, but no citation to policy was provided.)
  3. There had been no objection to a previous refactoring.
  4. There has now been an objection, and there has been no refactoring since the objection.
  5. When asked about the refactoring, the objector did not dispute that content was not changed.
  6. The objection is based on copyright principles, not on WP:OWN–with every edit window editors agree "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here."
In summary, I think that the admin's finding that I "changed meaning" is without merit, but I don't know that the admin wants to spend time on working toward consensus on this point.  I'll remind the admin that I have agreed that I was in error to revert twice as related to Diff#4.  Would the admin agree that he has been ineffective in building consensus between myself and Airborne84?  Thanks, RB  66.217.118.59 (talk) 17:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
I am here to help build an encyclopedia. I want to work on articles, not debate you. I am a volunteer, same as everyone else here, and do not have a job description, so I am not sure how it is my job to build consensus with anyone. There is a difference between article space (where anything can be edited by anyone) and talk space (where the default is to preserve an indvidual's comments without change, with some fairly narrowly defined exceptions). Since you made negative comments about the article (some of which I quoted), I assumed you disliked it. Sorry to put words in your mouth.
On the Sentence spacing talk page you wrote something of your background including how many words per minute you can type. I consider this completely irrelevant and off topic to improving the Sentence spacing article (even if you are the world's expert on Sentence spacing, Wikipedia is based on verifiable published works, not experts posting here). However, I did not refactor your comments it as: 1) these are your words and something you feel is important; 2) removing them would change the context and meaning of your other statements ; and 3) it is a waste of time. Please move on and comment on the article. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 18:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Improving the Article includes me and Airborne84 working together.
WP:REFACTOR states, "Good refactoring practices are an important part of maintaining a productive talk page...If another editor objects to refactoring then the changes should be reverted."
To be clear about my expectations here, I don't need a response from the admin.  Thanks, RB  66.217.118.202 (talk) 01:41, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
If you do not need a response from me, why did you post here? ;-) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 05:16, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I think that the information at WP:REFACTOR is highly relevant.  Likewise the talk page there reflects the basic nature of the conflict we have had here.  RB  66.217.118.131 (talk) 22:08, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I do not think we have had a conflict. A disagreement, perhaps. I am waiting for the discussion at Talk:Sentence spacing to move on (which is why our discussion was moved here in the first place). You have yet to answer my repeated questions - why do you feel the article is not worthy of being a WP:FA? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:21, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Sir,
I have documented that refactoring is a normal WP process, and that it is common for WP editors to not recognize refactoring.  If you want to continue this thread, then please take it to the appropriate noticeboard, further discussion here is not going to help.  If you want to move on, then I've made repeated invitations for you to do so, two of them in my last two posts.  If you want to help me and Airborne84 build consensus, that would be appreciated.  Thank you, RB  66.217.118.47 (talk) 05:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Please have a look...

at here please. Is this ready for FL or not? Thank you.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 13:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

thank you for your review.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:40, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

hey thanks for the peer review of Linkin Park discography. I will make the necessary changes to improve the article =D thx! --Neo139 (talk) 13:43, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

thanks for signing for me

I hadn't had coffee yet, missed that, thanks! --Nuujinn (talk) 18:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on December 1, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 1, 2010. If you think that it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! TbhotchTalk C. 06:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey, something I recognize on the Main Page! Congrats! ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Me too. I was surpised to see it. Congrats! Dincher (talk) 02:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Me too too. Or should that be me three? Way to go! Finetooth (talk) 02:26, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Congrats with an extra "well done" thrown in. Somehow I was thinking the toilet pix should have been in the main article, rather than just in Commons, but that's probably just a personal preference. Smallbones (talk) 15:00, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject's US and DC

It looks like Wikipedia:WikiProject District of Columbia is interested in being the next one to collaborate with WPUS. I have already spoken to 3 out of the 5 active editors and they are on board and think that it will be a good idea. That will probably take me the rest of the month cause that's about 25000 articles. I left a comment on the talk page of the WPDC page if you want to leave a comment about that one. --Kumioko (talk) 04:39, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on December 10, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 10, 2010. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 06:10, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

You again??? Congratulations!! Dincher (talk) 00:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
You must be butter. ;) Dincher (talk) 03:24, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

First Church of Deliverance

Indeed. Thanks. IvoShandor (talk) 07:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

As always, your contributions are appreciated. Those are good pics too. It really is a neat building. IvoShandor (talk) 05:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Doom bar peer review

Thanks a lot for peer reviewing Doom Bar, you have given me a lot to work on. Glancing over, I can see I'm going to have a few questions, which I'll ask when I come to them if that's all right. I do appreciate the help! Cheers Worm 08:06, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Just a couple of questions, feel free to answer them where you like, I've got pretty much everything watchlisted!
  1. The sources are old because it is no longer a significant danger, the channel moved and there are less accidents. I'm already referencing the more modern books I've found, but I found a lot more from the 19th century. Is there a way to resolve this?
  2. Regarding the hedges and gardens, I was using that to show that Cornwall specifically has acidic sand, and that shell sand could be used to combat that. That matched my other reference that the doom bar had a high percentage shell sand, and was used in agriculture. When I put it up for a good review, I needed a little more explanation of how and why it was used with manure, and that reference was the best I could find. I'm not sure I could find a Doom Bar reference which states that Cornwall has acidic soil AND how sand from the Doom Bar is used to combat that.
Otherwise, I'll try and have a go at adding your suggestions, thanks again for your help Worm 10:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Happy Chanukkah

Thanks :). No one quite recognizes that I am Jewish so thanks. :)Mitch32(Transportation Historian) 10:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Gianni Schicchi image problem

Thanks indeed for picking that up. The thing is, however, I have used a different version of the image from File:Gianni Schicchi will scene.jpg, with the large-print title GIANNI SCHICCHI cropped out. I loaded this as File:Schicchi will reading crop.jpg and that is the version used in the article. Would you mnd looking at that, to see if it needs attention? As far as I am concerned, the other can be deleted. Brianboulton (talk) 00:52, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

The peer review of 2010 Sylvania 300

Thank you for peer reviewing the article. Happy editing, and its nice to meet you. Nascar1996 21:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Also I have a question regarding one of your comments; the comment: "I think it is clear this needs a copyedit, preferably from a fresh pair of eyes." When you say a fresh pair of eyes do you mean someone outside of racing or maybe someone with better experience? Nascar1996 04:12, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay. I have added the article to Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. Hopefully all of this work can result in Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR's first FA. Nascar1996 14:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks and apologies

Thanks for your efforts in tidying up the Gianni Schicchi images; I made a real mess of uploading this, and have to request that you also delete File:Gianni Schicchi general scene.jpg, with which I inadvertently included the page text? The article is now at peer review. Much of my time in the past few weeks has been dedicated to getting a rather longer article, Evelyn Waugh, to FAC. Now that is done, I should be able to be more active at PR again. I have been keeping a slightly nervous eye on the backlog, and hope soon to help with tackling it. Brianboulton (talk) 00:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Minority Report (film)

Would you mind taking a look at this article? I was the original main contributor along with Igordebraga, and noticed you edited it a little before, as a matter of fact the description of the plot thats in there now is one that you edited it to back in 2008. I reverted it to that version because the section has a tendency to grow out of control, and that edition looked coherent and concise. I've done an insane amount of work on it in the last week. The one thing I know there is probably a problem with is the references, as I never use templates except when working on someone else's article. Igor put them in and since I don't own the page I used them but am not an expert in them tbh.

Some notes; I haven't really followed of the standardized film formats or looked too hard at other film fas; to me like citation templates, standardized formats are good for rookies, newbs, first timers, etc. Or just as a quick basic way to format an article, rather than some dogmatic guideline to follow. Also, I used two lists. In general, I always use prose but I couldn't see a coherent way around these two. Lastly, I started some daughter articles but for right now those are more for expansion of those areas than trimming the main article. Thanks in advance. AaronY (talk) 08:30, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Either way is fine. Thank you.AaronY (talk) 08:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Also, honestly the few days wait is fine. Since I wrote it so feverishly, I'll take another look at it today and maybe tomorrow. That way you won't have to waste your time with obvious errors I missed that I can fix myself. AaronY (talk) 13:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Exelon Pavilions

Just to let you know I've updated the Exelon Pavilions talk page re value of electricity generated... Talk:Exelon_Pavilions#Should_this_be_included.3F

IanOfNorwich (talk) 00:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Evelyn Waugh images

You kindly indicated that you would review this article at FAC. No hurry, but when you do, can I ask that you include in your review the images? I don't believe there are any problems now, but there were issues at the peer review which involved some discussions between users Jappalang and SlimVirgin. Both of these editors have registered supports at FAC, without specific comment on the images; I think they wanted someone else to pass judgment. Image reviewing at FAC is a bit haphazard at present, so I'd be very pleased if you would step in - unless someone else gets there first, of course. Brianboulton (talk) 16:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:32, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Seasonal Greeting

Renewable energy task force

Please see Portal talk:Renewable energy#Task force ?... Johnfos (talk) 19:24, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar award

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for Peer Reviewing Interpretive science. Your comments are appreciated... Novus Orator 09:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Schicchi again

Gianni Schicchi has reached FAC; it's my last FAC nom of the year, conommed with Wehwalt. Would you mind reviewing the sources on this, as there is still no one but me regularly active in this area at FAC. I'll ask someone else to check out the images – you kindly lent a hand with these earlier on, remember. There is no hurry at all for this as what with the holiday season I expect the article to be up for a while. I hope you have a wonderful Christmas and some rest from your labours. Last year I was at sunny Carcassone; this year I'm in snowy Britain. Brianboulton (talk) 19:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

PR: Herbie Hewett

Thanks for your review of Herbie Hewett, I think I have covered most of your points, and I hoped you might be able to revisit the review. Thanks, Harrias talk 09:47, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

And Happy New Year! Finetooth (talk) 18:11, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you too! Dincher (talk) 19:35, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas amigo!! Have a great New Year!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:29, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

List of personal computer refurbishment and recycling centers

Hi, I'm having some problem getting the subject article listed for Peer Review (after a name change to remove all caps) - it doesn't get past Step 3 and so no "Peer Review" tag on the Discussion page. Purging doesn't help. Is there a way to get it back on track? Simesa (talk) 11:04, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Thanks; and the same to you and yours. I hope you have a happy holiday season and a great 2011. Mike Christie (talklibrary) 13:57, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Request to peer review

Hello Ruhrfisch! I'm the main author and creator of Cuisine of Madagascar. Jerem43, who reviewed it and awarded GA status, recommended you as someone who might be willing to provide further feedback for its peer review as part of the process in taking it to FA status. This would be the first in what I hope will be a series of articles about Malagasy culture and history to make it to FA (my Music of Madagascar article is at GA now, and Architecture of Madagascar is waiting for a GA review). As it stands, the only FA articles on Madagascar topics are about the wildlife, but I feel the Malagasy people deserve equal if not better representation here on Wikipedia. Thank you in advance for any help you might be willing to provide, and all the best to you for 2011! -- Lemurbaby (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy new year

Happy New Year from Erie, PA! ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:00, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the holiday card. Have a happy new year, — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Hope you had a good Christmas, as well, and all the best for 2011. Not quite as nifty a holiday message as yours, but a photo of Bicentennial Tower fits the bill quite well ;-) ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:00, 1 January 2011 (UTC)