User talk:TheQuandry/Archive/2007 February
Halloween producers
[edit]Thanks for that but actually it was the edit before yours I was removing (which is why I immediately restored yours) and accidentally removed your intermediate edit as well. Sorry to have put you to extra trouble. WJBscribe (WJB talk) 19:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
CHICOTW
[edit]
|
| |
|
You voted for the Chicago Collaboration of the week, and Cities and Villages Act of 1872 has been chosen. Please help improve it to raise it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see a list of open tasks.
| ||
|
| |
I am going to have to change this template to acknowledge editors who don't vote. I appreciated your editorial assistance last week. We look forward to your future contributions. TonyTheTiger 00:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Checkuser
[edit]Aw, I kinda resent that you reported Petri Krohn as the Sockpuppeteer. After all, the original accusation was directed at me. :( Additionally, Whiskey has the oldest wiki account of us all ([1]), so, technically, he should be the Master.
I also find it hard to believe that you actually have seriously considered Kven's arguments (even for a moment). Mind pointing out the similar ways of speaking of Roobit and me? I actually find his tendency of lashing out at other users somewhat annoying, even though he does have a point sometimes.
With the above being said, I still think the procedure was a good idea. —Illythr 20:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, I just noticed that the result was "Unlikely", not "Unrelated"! Maybe, I'll still be able to at least mind control user Whiskey one day...
- A dashing ruse! :-) Well, okay then, point withdrawn.
- I'm mostly holed up in Chisinau. The city is okay (used to be worse), but it is still in the process of transition from Soviet style to European in many aspects. As for the wine, well, Europe's biggest wine cellar, Cricova is in the country. A major export item an' all. Russia seems to think otherwise, though. Bah, politics. --Illythr 22:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 4 | 22 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag | WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness" |
| News and notes: Talk page template, milestones | Wikipedia in the News |
| Features and admins | The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
CHICOTW voting
[edit]You may want to reconsider your vote in light of editing made recently. I have also voiced my opinion on such editing. TonyTheTiger 15:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
CHICOTW
[edit]|
|
| |
|
Last week you voted for the Chicago COTW. Thank you! This week Merle Reskin Theatre (formerly Blackstone Theatre) has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
| ||
|
| |
TonyTheTiger 00:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I was considering putting it up for an MfD, but I had hoped to formulate alternatives first. Hopefully I can get more feedback - was gonna leave it about a week I think. --Robdurbar 15:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Not quite a sockpuppet. Woomoobs57 (talk · contribs) (AKA Chris57 (talk · contribs) and Yaymoobs57 (talk · contribs) is a 14-year-old named Chris. Moneal04 (talk · contribs) is his friend Neal. They made an atrocious (by the sound of it) VHS video about communist ninja factory workers in 1840 (not making that up), Factory: The Musical (now salted). The AFD is Here. Since that time they have engaged in nothing but vandalism, most of it to my user page and user talk. Fan-1967 15:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and it doesn't take a genius to figure out that Fan1967isfat (talk · contribs) is another sock. (For the record, I'm 5'9"", 140 lbs.) Fan-1967 16:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with user:Ploughman
[edit]That user seemed intent on pushing a POV that us regular editors could not contain. His reverts using the term vandalism was chilling. Ronbo76 21:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
But... please don't break 3RR to revert notices on his page or any other. Get it protected if necessary, as has now happened William M. Connolley 22:12, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- I appreciate the 3RR rule, but I think it should be safe for me to WP:IAR when battling vandals and sockpuppets of banned users. TheQuandry 22:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- You are immune for established socks of banned users. But its also rather pointless, as you to-and-fro. If it really is an established sock of a banned user, its better to get it banned William M. Connolley 22:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please see result of checkuser against this person [2]. Not sure why the checkuser admin didn't ban him. He also vandalized the RFCU page itself several times. [3]. I filed a report on AIV, but it was deleted. WP: Suspected Sockpuppets has a months long backlog. I wanted nothing more than to get the sock indefblocked, but nobody seemed to be around. TheQuandry 22:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Removal of NPOV tag on Bhopal Article
[edit]I'm wondering why you removed the NPOV tag on the Bhopal_Disaster. The neutrality of the article has been in question for some time, and I have been working on it as I can, but it is need of a major overhaul. Jemather 23:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted some vandalism and it looked to me like the vandal had added the template. Re-add it if you wish. I am curious about what you think is POV in this article. You seem to have removed a lot of text that was cited and referenced. TheQuandry 17:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the content I removed was plagiarized from its references that I would call questionable at best. Beyond that, I don't like the article's approach. I feel like it should be relatively simple and matter-of-fact, with criticisms put into the "Criticisms" section, instead of a having a running commentary throughout the whole article. It also extensively uses a "we-say, they-say" duality I don't think does an adequate job of framing the situation. Thoughts? Jemather 14:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- That seems to make sense. So it's not so much POV as it is just a poorly written article with some copyright infringing text? In any case, good luck with your rewrite! TheQuandry 15:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Most of the content I removed was plagiarized from its references that I would call questionable at best. Beyond that, I don't like the article's approach. I feel like it should be relatively simple and matter-of-fact, with criticisms put into the "Criticisms" section, instead of a having a running commentary throughout the whole article. It also extensively uses a "we-say, they-say" duality I don't think does an adequate job of framing the situation. Thoughts? Jemather 14:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Sourced
[edit]You have reverted one of my edits on what seems to be a disagreement on what the sources says. Since I originally entered the sentence "some 250 000" my memory is that there was no lower range of 50 000 to the figure. However, I'm willing to admit that my memory may be wrong. Why don't you direct me to the apropriate page in Andrew and Mitrokhin and we'll take it from there. :) Prezen 19:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- bottom of page 28, The Sword and the Shield, paperback edition, basic books: "During the civil war, by contrast, Cheka executions probably numbered as many as 250,000, and may well have exceeded the number of death in battle." Attached to the sentence is a footnote 30 which refers to vol. 10, ch. 3, para 23. If I understand the bibliography section correctly it vol refers to typewritten notes made by Mitrochin himself. Do we restore my edit? Prezen 20:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 5 | 29 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 18:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
JP is back
[edit]I think. Prezen 23:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
CHICOTW
[edit]|
|
| |
|
Last week you voted for the Chicago COTW. Thank you! This week Rich Melman has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
| ||
|
| |
TonyTheTiger 00:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
As one who voted for Rich Melman, I hope you might be able to add to the to do list. TonyTheTiger 01:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
AK Miller
[edit]Thanks for noticing. I will look him up in the census too, and try to find when his dad died. It looks like he never applied for Social Security. But, thats nor surprising. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 02:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Backdash
[edit]Just filing the checkuser request. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 19:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, he's the one that seems to fit the bill best. I've added a polite request that the checkusers get to this one quickly :) Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 20:21, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
CHICOTW GAonhold
[edit]|
|
| |
|
You were a contributing editor to Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago during its tenure as CHICOTW. It has been placed on Good article on hold status thanks in part to your efforts. See its GA review and help us raise it towards the featured article classification level. The article was given good article on hold status on February 2, 2007. It will be reevaluated in between 2 and 7 days from this date. Recall that during its tenure as CHICOTW we achieved the following Improvement. See our CHICOTW Improvement History.
| ||
|
| ||
.svg) |
| |
TonyTheTiger 20:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
WRT, Rich Melman. Whatever becomes CHICOTW will be our article for one week unless there is unanimous consent among those who voted for it that we should switch to another article. Five weeks after that it will be nominated as a WP:GA regardless of the editting as long as we continue to run CHICOTW. Melman is short. It is a matter of us making the pages look professional. We can still do a lot for his webpage. Let's add Template:Infobox Celebrity information. Also, take a look at the Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises article and see if any info should be swapped out in either direction. TonyTheTiger 21:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Possible JP IP sock
[edit]Check out 68.126.5.42 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - I am highly suspicious. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 20:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- And WHOIS says California, like previous JP ips. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 20:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's WP:SCISSORS you posted on, not my talk page! Moreschi Deletion! 21:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I think so. I'm blowing off my Jacob-caused stress on IRC :) Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 21:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 6 | 5 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
CHICOTW
[edit]|
|
| |
|
Last week you voted for the Chicago COTW. Thank you! This week Little Italy, Chicago has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
| ||
|
| |
Since you have voted for this and probably know the topic better than me please help with the to do list. TonyTheTiger 00:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- This weeks topic seems to be coming along. What is up with the picture? Of course, add references when you get a chance. TonyTheTiger 16:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Question at AN/I
[edit]I saw your question at AN/I and noticed it went unanswered. The protected page he edited was his monobook.js page. Everyone has one, see yours or mine as an example. This page is used to customize the way you use Wikipedia with add-on Java Scripts. Also see Help:User style, this page might help explain a little better. John Reaves (talk) 06:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Syd Barrett
[edit]Hello, please accept my apologies: I didn't reply to the message you posted here, becouse I have been away from Wikipedia for a few months. I've recently come back, so feel free to send me any message, I will be able to reply shortly. Best regards. --Dr. Who 22:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Copyedit
[edit]You seem to be the CHICOTW go to guy for copy editing. I am probably going to attempt to make a 2nd WP:FAC nomination of my Campbell's Soup Cans article in the next week or two. I know this article has nothing to do with Chicago The main complaint from FAC1 that I have not yet addressed is a uniform complaint that it needs to be copy edited. If the subject does not bore you too much, I would really appreciate a fresh pair of eyes on this. TonyTheTiger 22:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- It seems you are in the midst of a very close copyedit. Thank you for the effort. I have one question. In the automated peer review I was directed to consult the Manual of Style (numbers). Are you sure about the stylistic change you made to the dimension of the canvases?
- It seems you remember grammar rules that I may have once known, or may have never known. I assume you are generally correct because what you have done seems to flow better. Thanks for the help. TonyTheTiger 19:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
|
The Original Barnstar
I award this Barnstar to TheQuandry for his dedication to the pursuit of excellence as demonstrated through his copyediting skill, which has recently, on command performance, aided efforts at Campbell's Soup Cans after having been regularly volunteered at CHICOTW. TonyTheTiger 18:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC) |
- My first award! TheQuandry 18:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I received my first today. So I was in the mood for giving. I moved a replica of mine to my user page for all to see. TonyTheTiger 18:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I just wanted to mention to my award-winning copyeditor that I added a bit to Campbell's Soup Cans ([4]). TonyTheTiger 16:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
74.39.196.130
[edit]I apologize for any vandalism this IP has caused recently. It belongs to a school, so there may be many different vandals here. I would recommend that you block this IP permanently from editing, if it is capable for you to do so. --TinDragon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.39.196.130 (talk) 18:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC).
GA Notice
[edit]|
|
| |
|
You were a contributing editor to Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago during its tenure as CHICOTW. It has successfully achieved Good article status thanks in part to your efforts. See its GA review and help us raise it towards the featured article classification level. Recall that during its tenure as CHICOTW we achieved the following Improvement. See our CHICOTW Improvement History.
| ||
|
| ||
 |
| |
TonyTheTiger 19:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help with Campbell's Soup Cans again. I removed the questionable comment. One of the talk page comments was that I made a statement in the conclusion that was not backed up in the main body of the article. I was trying to address it by mentioning his other career interests. How valid a complaint is this?
Washington Park, Chicago
[edit]Given the MCA good article review, I think we may be able to turn ourselves into a WP:GA factory. I think we should review our past articles with this review in mind. I.E., we should consider the six things that good article candidates are judged for. I am going to try to spend some time today with the Washington Park, Chicago articles that are in the good article candidate queue. I am going to put a note about this on the CHICOTW page. I think some of our past articles may be deserving especially if we clean them up a little. TonyTheTiger 19:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- That could be fun. I'll copyedit/proofread as usual. I DO have more stuff to add to Rich Melman (and still need to read through), but have had a crazy couple of weeks at work so haven't been able to do much. TheQuandry 19:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)