User talk:Ceranthor/Archive 4

Frances J. White

Thanks for accepting the Frances J. White page. I've been using her research in a project I'm doing and was surprised she didn't have a page here; there is a Frances White page but its for an actress so there might need to be a disambiguation page (also it might be a good idea to cross-reference the Francis White and Frances White pages (spelled with an I or an E) as there are a number of Francis Whites too.

She is a conteporary of Richard Wrangham (he's got a page) and they have worked closely together on research/publications. I can provide more info later too, but I just wanted to get the page started. Thanks again, Chris - unregistered user

Anahim hotspot

I noticed you nominated Anahim hotspot for GA review. Note that the article only has a one sentence lead, which is way too short. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Anahim hotspot lead

I can't think of anything else to add in the introduction. A hotspot is basically a spot on the Earth that doesen't move. There's other hotspot articles that have similar introductions. For example, see Iceland hotspot. Black Tusk 01:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Earthquakes

No problem. I think the Mount Garibaldi article should be listed as GA for now because it failed being FA. Black Tusk 22:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Mount Baker Peer Review

• Could you give some information on modern climbing activity? Also some information about the environmental status of the surrounding land would be beneficial.

Thanks.—RJH (talk) 21:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

By this you are referring to the Snoqualmie National Forest, and the wilderness area, plus the ski area? ~Meldshal42_{Hit me}^{What I've Done} 19:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Pretty much just the immediate vicinity of the mountain. The Moon Handbook mentions that the mountain has four "life zones", ranging from seasonal forest to alpine meadows. It also says that it is home to coyotes, black beart, black-tailed dear, porcupines, elk, marmots, mountain goats, grouse, gray jays and ptarmigan.

A couple more notes from the handbook:

• The indigenous people called it "Koma Kulshan" (broken one),[1] which is apparently a reference to an earlier eruption that removed the top.
• Beginning in 1911 is formed part of the Mt. baker marathon. Later this was revived as the "Ski to Sea Marathon".

Finally, there's a USGS geologic map at: http://geomaps.wr.usgs.gov/pacnw/nc/baker1.html

Thanks.—RJH (talk) 14:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hello, this is the first time I've tried to use a talk page. Wikipedia has so many layers that I don't know if I will learn them all. Thank you, Meldshal42, for the star you sent me regarding my article on Mildred Thompson. I look forward to learning more about Wikipedia and writing/editing entries. Glassnote (talk) 20:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: Sembawang Hot Spring - GA On Hold

Pse refer to my reply on the abovementioned here. Thank you. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 05:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I can understand that you're upset at some of the comments that have been made during the review of this article, but you have to remember that your role is that of an independent reviewer. You're there to conduct the review and to give your opinion, not to argue the toss with the nominators. I suggest that you decide whether or not to list the article as a GA asap, as it's clear that further delay is likely to be unproductive. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 02:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

mnemonic edit

I deleted text that made no sense in the context of the article. I had to dig around in the discussion page of the article to understand that this was a reference to cranial nerves. Thanks for your boilerplate entry on my talk page though. Really constructive yourself. Deleting text that doesn't make sense _is_ constructive in my opinion. The alternative would have been to expend the text to include context that would allow readers to understand what the Finn/German reference was about. As I took the time to read the discussion page and look through the edit history, I know that this kind of detail has already been deleted from the article as trivia/violating NOR. Blunto (talk) 21:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

King Arthur FAC

I have removed the King Arthur FAC; please see the instructions at WP:FAC, specifically:

Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FAC process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to nomination.

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Images

Thanks, in the past I've had my own photos, labelled as such and used in articles, deleted without warning because the requirements have changed (eg the introduction of the templated licences), and I've had public domain images removed because of a new requirement for a url even for US federal sites. Unlike the rest of Wikipedia, image uploads seem to be treated as "bad faith" unless proved otherwise, and policies are applied retrospectively. I appreciate what you are doing, but I just ignore the image deletion notices now, since I have little confidence in the system, and dislike effectively being treated as a vandal. jimfbleak (talk) 05:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

After the above, this is going to seem really nit-picking.

1. You shouldn't specify an image size for a thumb, since it then overrides user preferences
2. The article name shouldn't appear in the caption
3. text shouldn't be sandwiched between two images

normally, apart from the first point, these don't matter, but Blackbird is a featured article, and so I've made changes there. jimfbleak (talk) 05:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Scattered Disk

{talkback} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuel Sol (talk • contribs) 19:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

After determining you are an experienced and trusted user, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback can only be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you do not want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 22:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

As to my article in Ballistic vest

Hello.

I read your message about my paragraph in Ballistic vest. I added the paragraph because this vest is the very first one invented 1860s, and the related record is very clear. The US army took this vest in the battle 1871. The real vest is stored in a museum.

So, I think that it is very important contribution to the history of Ballistic vest. I think that anyone who want know about the first bullet-proof vest has a right to know the story about this vest. I hope that you'd suggest how to improve my writing instead of reverting the page if you think that my writing is not good enough.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chopinxenakis (talk • contribs) 03:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

1992 Nicaragua earthquake]]

May I please ask you why you failed 1992 Nicaragua earthquake in the GA review without a reason? Sure, it's damn short, but there isn't that much to be written an I have seen several FAs on hurricanes and tropical storms that aren't much longer. Would you please give a reason? I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 23:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

And yet you passed Mary Meader. I think I've got pretty much all the good, reliable sources. However if you have a newspaper archive subscription that would be GREAT. I'm currently working on List of heads of state of Gabon to bring this to FL status. There's nothing above start class on Gabon at the present. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 20:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Certainly. FYI I also created and DYKed 1994 Bolivia earthquake. What particularly drives me is that the article was tagged for speedy deletion twice, deleted once, and is not even yet a DYK? (it will be the 11th, but it would be great if it were "good" before then). I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 20:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

The image:Uh, duh, it's me. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 22:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't get your sense of humour. :) I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 22:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know, the article now has 8 sources. I'll see what else I can dig up. But for now, could you please pass it as a GA? I look forward to collaboration with you in the future. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 00:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Anahim hotspot

I don't know much about this so I don't think I'd give it a good review. One thing I noticed right away is that the intro needs to be longer; one-sentence intros never work. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

• Go ahead, you can ask another user if you want. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:31, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
• Hi Meldshal42. The Anahim hotspot article is currently a GAN and needs improvments. Black Tusk 23:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hell's Gate National Park

Hi Meldshal. Could you please review Hell's Gate National Park. Thanks. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 20:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

How is ref no. 7 messed up?

Do you know of a public domain source where I can upload images about the park? I suppose the map is a start. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 21:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. No. and as far as ref. #7, the reference appears to be a continuation of the 6th reference. ~Meldshal42 17:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

No it isn't, Ref no. 6 was for the senence or two that was on both pages. Ref no. 7 was for just that page. P.S. While I personally do not think it is ready for GA status, the 1556 Shaanxi earthquake has been listed at GAC, as per your request. I will look into your suggestions on how to improve the article. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 02:41, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you still reviewing Hell's Gate? I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 13:11, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, Ceranthor. You have new messages at RyRy5's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- RyRy5 (talk) 20:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia: WikiProject Swimming

Hi there, Ive recently joined the WP:WikiProject Swimming team. Im committed to getting on top of the project. Since you have listed yourself as a participant i thought i'd let you know what i've done. Ive got a bot thats going through the relevant catagouries that apply to the project and tagging them with our banner. Ive done all the stub class articles and assessed them automaticlly, and im starting on the 3000 other articles that ive identified. So this will mean that we will have all the articles in the scope of the project together and we can start working on them. So if you have any spare time theres going to be thousands of articles that will need assessing. There are around 2000 articles Just in in stub class, and most of these will need the importance assessed. I think it's important we get all this assessing done, so we can start working on the articles.

Don't fell pressured to start assessing articles, i just thought that since theres going to be so many articles, you should know that theres heaps of work that needs to be done, ill be trying my best once my exams are finished. Remember many hands make light work.

Cheers Printer222 (talk) 13:20, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:1992 Nicaragua earthquake

Indeed, I remember tagging this article {{db-vandalism}}, when it was nothing but a stub. But if I remember correctly, I self-reverted, and the creator is perfectly aware of what happened. It's the kind of thing that should not reflected in the article's "milestones". As a matter of fact, I am quite happy that the article is headed to FA status.

On an unrelated note, can you please add three apostrophes at the end of your signature line? --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 17:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

GA reviews

Are you still reviewing Hell's Gate National Park I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 14:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I have. Also, I disagree with your passing of Shanxi. It has several unreferenced paragraphs, and the referencing style isn't consistant. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 19:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

You may wish to know that Hell's Gate has an image... I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 00:41, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Musical Instruments roll call

Hello, this is an informal roll call of past participants of WikiProject Musical Instruments. I'd like to revive the project and start bringing some musical instrument articles up to featured article status. If you're interested in joining us, please sign your name here and we'll discuss what everyone wants to do. --Laser brain (talk) 21:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Oxalic acid.

I don't think my edit to oxalic acid was unconstructive. Do you disagree that the image is redundant and of lower quality? 148.177.1.218 (talk) 20:35, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

The image serves no purpose. In fact, a poor-quality redundant image lowers the quality of the article. 148.177.1.218 (talk) 20:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Sock Obama

Hi. Thanks for the note on my userpage. You certainly are enthusiastic about nominating new articles for speedy deletion! If you would have taken the time to read the article before nominating it, you would have seen that I have included four references to newspaper articles which show that the subject of the article was pulled due to "widespread outrage", and that the product was condemned by the NAACP. It received nationwide press coverage. It is highly notable, and the article describes that coverage and provides more than ample proof of such coverage. Your nomination of the article is counter-productive, to put it very, very kindly. — goethean ॐ 21:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Could you remove the db-company template from the article? It is against policy for me to do it. — goethean ॐ 21:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

re: Trumpet

I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Is there a reason you don't want to list it? --Laser brain (talk) 21:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't feel comfortable doing that since I'm not really familiar with the article. I think the GA process is that you nominate an article you believe is good, and an uninvolved person eventually reviews it. --Laser brain (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

After seeing this exchange at Laser's talk page, I've raised this here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

How embarrassing. I am disappointed. Matt (talk) 01:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Scattered disc

This is going to be an immensely difficult article to get up to code, as it will require reading a large number of technical papers (there's no easy way into it, and unfortunately, it is rather important). I'm terrified of doing it alone, and am trying to get interested parties onside. Are you an interested party? :) Serendi^podous 16:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm in - let's get a checklist together and task it out and get it done. YEAH GO TEAM! UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 13:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to say yes, we should change most of the SDOs to scattered disc objects. There might be a few to keep, but anything in prose should be expanded. I also see "disc" and "disk" used interchangeably; should we not select one and stick with it? I'll see what sources I can dig up later today. UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 17:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

It can be done, but it is beyond us right now. If I wanted to I could probably get it up, but it would require a full-time commitment, which I simply cannot offer right now (despite appearances, I do have something approaching a life). Ideally, the article requires the efforts of someone with intimate knowledge of the subject, but I doubt Mike Brown or Dave Jewitt would be all that interested in helping us :) So I think it's best if we do the slow-drip method on SD, like we did with Planet, which didn't even become a GA for three years. Serendi^podous 14:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Peer review usually is. Anyway; I know what is needed for the article. The problem isn't figuring out what is needed for the article; the problem is that it's flipping hard. Serendi^podous 07:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Prod tags

Hi Meldshal42, I noticed you gave User:Clockwork84 a warning message for removing a prod tag. Any editor is free to remove a prod tag, including the original author. The "hangon" tag is only used for speedy deletion. You can view more information here: WP:PROD. Somno (talk) 00:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Template SUBSTing

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When using certain templates on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:uw-test1}} instead of {{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you. SchfiftyThree 01:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Anahim hotspot

Thanks. Black Tusk (talk) 01:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I wonder what is needed for an FA... Black Tusk (talk) 17:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

lol not exactly, but it's something to work on =) Black Tusk (talk) 17:36, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

José Azueta (sailor)

Hi, I've contested your speedy deletion --AW (talk) 19:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

This was never a speedy candidate of any sort and certainly not an A7. In any event, please do not tag pages for deletion less than a minute after they are created unless they are blatant vandalism or attack pages; it is extremely disruptive, potentially driving new editors off the project as well as wasting the time of the admins who have to revert the inappropriate tagging. – iridescent 20:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXV - June 2008

The June 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveBot (owner) 02:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Cold War

I don't know if you've seen Sandy Georgia's comments at the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cold War page, but it's unusual for the assistant director to critique a candidate article, and I think she's right: so many of the basics aren't in place yet. I believe she has had to speak because some of the supports are undetailed. Really, I have to tell you that without commentary, supports are unlikely to be counted. To be a good reviewer, one has to spend a long time reading an article, making a list of queries and comments, etc., in order to contribute to an FAC's development. I would say that this usually takes at least four hours. I don't know if it would surprise you, but I have sometimes spent a week just on one review!

I've seen you around at King Arthur and William Shakespeare, so I know that you care about the best articles and about how much time and care they need. Wikipedia: Peer Review is a good place to practise one's reviewing skills, I think: there's no vote or star there, so no one's going to come along like me, moaning and groaning about accuracy of reviewing. The best formula there is to choose a subject you know about or are interested in and get a book about it: then you can compare what is in the article with the source or sources and make contributions that will really help with the development of articles. Anyway, you are free to ignore me, if you like, but that's my suggestion about how best to contribute. We need people like you, who care about the best articles, involved in the process, not just voting yay or nay in a way that might raise some people's eyebrows.qp10qp (talk) 09:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Meldshal42; I wanted to let you know that the recent commentary that you entered on a FAC isn't an accurate reflection of Wiki guidelines and policies, and to reiterate Qp's mention that you might hone your reviewing skills and knowledge of policy and guideline by becoming active at peer review. You also might closely read and follow other FACs to come up to speed on the criteria, and begin to enter Support or Oppose declarations once you understand the criteria. Here are some helpful tips for reviewers: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:06, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, crumbs, I feel bad now because it was my message that sent you back into the FAC lion's den, where they bite a bit, don't they? I hope you don't get downhearted. I mean, FAC is really the most advanced bit of Wikipedia and reviewing at that level is really tough to do. As Sandy said, it's best to make comments based on the list of criteria. And it's true that leads don't always have citations, though some do: it's amatter of choice. The idea is to give the reader a nice start in the article, without too many blue tags, which can put people off; since the lead only contains short versions of what will come later in the article, the citations will mostly be further down somewhere. That article used shortened refs: with that style, you say something like "Gaddis, p. 72", and then you put the whole details of Gaddis's book or books in the book list, references list, or bibliography. This saves repeating the same information over and over again. All the best. qp10qp (talk) 01:21, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha. If you're not bothered, that's a relief. Armour plating is very handy around here! qp10qp (talk) 01:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Use of rollback

Why did you use rollback for this, where you used it to revert a good faith edit from an admin. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

After looking at it more closely, Andy isn't even blocked anymore - please explain. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for the explanation - an easy mistake to make. Could you please revert yourself please? Thanks again, Ryan Postlethwaite 23:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Tnossdosandcentaurs.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Tnossdosandcentaurs.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Images

I'm baffled by your comment - I can't imagine why I would upload images and not use them -presumably you have some examples in mind? jimfbleak (talk) 05:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I imagine I uploaded it and simply forgot. Normally I only upload stuff I want to use, although sometimes images become orphaned when someone replaces them (particularly these old paintings) with better images. Incidentally, a better way to image link without opening the image is image:Pallid.JPG jimfbleak (talk) 12:23, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jonathan Lade

I have nominated Jonathan Lade, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Lade. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? LegoTech·(t)·(c) 00:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

RFA

You're a good editor, so I don't think I'd have a problem with nominating you for RFA, if and when. let me give that some thought. From your comment, I presume you're not planning on filing an RFA anytime soon? UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 12:19, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, no problem. In the meantime, I'd take care with the rollback tool and speedy tagging, as both are items that reviewers look at when considering an RFA. Your contributions look good, and I'm not seeing any overt weaknesses - and having 4 Featured Articles to your credit is impressive. There's no urgency at all, let me know if you have any questions or concerns on how to prepare for adminship (as RFA's only the first bit), and we'll see what we can do. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 13:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Dude I'm sorry

I know I haven't been much of a help, but I'm trying to bend my head around the scattered disc literature (most of which is virtually incomprehensible scientific papers) and it's taking me a while to get to grips with it. Serendi^podous 13:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, this one isn't going to be as simple as Mercury ended up being at FAR... UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 13:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Charon

I still intend to get Scattered disc up to standard, but maybe it will require a slower pace. As for Charon, I'm not sure what can be said about it; we really won't know much until New Horizons gets there. Serendi^podous 16:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll add some material to Charon. What do you think is needed to get it up to GA? Serendi^podous 07:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Oort cloud

I don't think we're likely to get Oort cloud up for a while. By my calculations, any attempt to get it listed within the next year will give us exactly one point, as per it being a notable article. Wise man say most auspicious day for nomination January 13, 2010. That's the 50th anniversary of Oort's hypothesis (4 points). Plus by then it will have been featured for more than a year (1 point), though with a little cajolery we might be able to convince the admins that 1 year and 10 months is the same as two years (2 points), which would give us a grand total of 7 points. Serendi^podous 07:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

re: Musical instrument

Please see the working outline and bibliography on the article Talk page so we can work out what section you might like to work on. Identifying sources before writing is critical—I intend to make this a Featured article and the very best sources must be used. I consider the GA process a waste of time and resources, so I do not intend to pursue it. --Laser brain (talk) 15:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I noticed what you did so far and it looks good. I provided a list of freely available good sources on the article Talk page. I agree with Laser brain that the GA process is a waste of time. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 20:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it looked good! I didn't mean for you to remove it. As Wackymacs said, check out the list of sources and let's make sure we can source everything or at least have a plan to do so. --Laser brain (talk) 20:47, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you please discuss your sources at the article talk page first? The article will not pass muster if it uses inferior sources; we need to make sure we are using the best, authoritative sources available for each part of the article. --Laser brain (talk) 17:07, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

2002 Iran

Hi Meldshal, and thanks for the in-depth review! Just thought you might want to see my reactions to some of your points. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 20:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, and I only have 30, as of last count! It'd be great if we could bring this up to FA status. It's actually quite comprehensive. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 20:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you think this is "good" enough? I think I'll nominate this shortly after you pass it as the first major collaboration by WP:QUAKE! I hope to produce many more, and clean up many already created articles. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 20:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Knock knock? Are you doing any more reviewing of the article? I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 01:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I only used the preview of the article--quite usefull if you're working on relatively unknown subjects, if you get my drift. (: By the way, could you do a go-over of Mchinji--I don't think this will ever be a GA, too many stubbysections, but just want to know what you think o'it. I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 01:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I practically wrote that one from scratch. It didn't even have an infobox before I rambled across it! All it had, basically, was incorrect population data and this horribly-referenced transport section. User:EJF, User:Blofeld of SPECTRE and myself have been working on creating and expanding articles on developing countries such as those in Africa. Have you heard of the FritzpollBot? I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 01:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: Mount Garibaldi

I was going to take a look at it, but looks like another user beat me to it. :) Nikki311 21:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

2002 Bou'in-Zahra earthquake looks pretty good to me, and I'd pass it. What else do you think it needs? Nikki311 01:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

You'd pass that? I certainly wouldn't, and it would be straight to GAR if you did. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 01:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I passed Mount Garibaldi as a Good Article. I found that it met all the criteria and was of excellent quality. J.T Pearson (talk) 13:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --Black Tusk (talk) 16:29, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Rfa?

Hi, maybe in a few weeks? I don't know about now, though. Gary King (talk) 17:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:1946 Nankaido earthquake

My reply here. -- RyRy (talk) 21:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

This looks like a pretty reliable source, in case you want to use it. Do you think 2002 is ready for FAC? --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 22:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I have expanded the article 1kb. See what you think. --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 01:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

What abot the references is the problem? The lack of them? I'm very busy also, working on William Tubman and creating the ~10,000 Burkina Faso citystubs that need creating. I agree, it can be quite mind boggling sometimes, but I have to remember there is no deadline. It will probably take years before I complete just these two tasks, not to mention the many others backed up in my evil repository, but I don't care. That said, if there is anything I can do regarding those articles please tell me. --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 01:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm crazy. --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 02:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Could you please copyedit it? Nishkid found some MOS issues. --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 18:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Joining Wikiproject Earthquakes

Thanks for the invitation. I've already checked around that wikiproject and helped you guys update some stuff, but I'm not really a big editor for earthquakes. I usually stick to VG articles. I'll join if I suddenly begin editing Earthquake articles. But good work on the project! There is finally a wikiproject dedicated to earthquakes! --haha169 (talk) 16:45, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your !vote at my RFA

Thanks!

Thank you, Meldshal42, for your support !vote at my RFA. I will be doing my best to make sure that your confidence has not been misplaced. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 18:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Friendly reminder about talk page messages

Hello. As a recent editor at User talk:216.252.88.182, I wanted to leave you a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk page. While we may prefer that messages be archived, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous users- from deleting comments from their own talk pages. The only talk page messages that may not be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppetry notices, or shared IP header templates (for anonymous editors) ... and these exceptions are just to keep a user from gaming the system. Thanks, --Kralizec! (talk) 01:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm OK

Thank you for your note of concern. While I would have reacted as Aleta did in her position, I am ashamed and embarrassed that so many know I am not made of granite, as I like to come across. I promise you I would never do anything which would make Isaac unhappy. Jeffpw (talk) 07:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

1946 Nankaidō earthquake

On 3 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1946 Nankaidō earthquake, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 18:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

re:2008 Sichuan earthquake

Oh, absolutely. Leave me a note when the PR is done, though, since I'm too busy at the moment to check periodically. You PR is much appreciated! Thank you! :) --haha169 (talk) 21:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

??? The peer review is still open: here. --haha169 (talk) 21:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Proposals

Please comment on the current FA-Team proposals. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 16:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:34, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

King Arthur

Hi, thought I'd post to say hello having seen your post on Wrad's page and let you know I've nominated the King Arthur article for FA status -- sorry it took so long but I got buried under work when I got back! Anyways, thanks for all your help and fingers crossed :) Hrothgar cyning (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team successes!

Indigenous people of the Everglades region, Draining and development of the Everglades and Restoration of the Everglades have all recently become FAs! King Arthur is now at FAC! Thanks to our hard-working team members! Awadewit (talk) 18:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Island series

Template:Island series has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Cmprince (talk) 02:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The traditional rfa thank you message

		Thank you for the support!
		Ceranthor, it is my honor to report that thanks in part to your support my third request for adminship passed (80/18/2). I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me, and I will endeovour to put my newly acquired mop and bucket to work for the community as a whole. Yours sincerly and respectfuly, TomStar81 (Talk) 02:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

• You are welcome to remove this since it is spam, but I thought you might like to know, hence the reason I placed it here. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

John Lade

Saw this article: Man of Steal: Team USA's John Lade, thought you might be interested. I think this article would provide general notability for this BLP. -Mitico (talk) 12:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I should have been clearer. I was involved in the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Lade and realize that it was deleted. At that time (a couple weeks ago or so) there was no "indepedent" & "significant coverage" of Lade per WP:N. The available resources would have been his Nova player bio, gamesheets, and article of the CAA 1st team, but nothing specifically about Lade -- therefore he failed general notability & WP:Athlete. In the AFD discussion, User:Calvin 1998 stated that "unless this athlete gains notability through the generic third-party sources method or goes pro..." --- This article, IMO, is that generic third-party sources. If you'd like to discuss with others from the AFD before you re-create that might be a good idea, but I believe that if the AFD were still open the result would now be to keep. -Mitico (talk) 12:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll talk to GeometryGuy

Let's hope we can get this going! Serendi^podous 21:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:AFC

Thank you for reviewing submissions at WP:AFC. However, to keep the page organized, please mark the submission you reviewed with {{subst:afc top|accept}} or {{subst:afc top}} (decline) just below the headline, and {{subst:afc b}} at the very bottom of the submission. Thank you.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 14:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)