User talk:Gary/Archives/2008

AfD nomination of Comedy workshop

An article that you have been involved in editing, Comedy workshop, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comedy workshop. Thank you. Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 20:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Carmen Fratrum Arvalium

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Carmen Fratrum Arvalium, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 02:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for comment on Category Redirect template

Because you are a member of WikiProject Categories, your input is invited on some proposed changes to the design of the {{Category redirect}} template. Please feel free to view the proposals and comment on the template talk page. --Russ (talk) 21:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Easys

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Easys, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 13:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Topbar logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Topbar logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup cats

Done. Rich Farmbrough, 16:16 30 January 2008 (GMT).

Speedy deletion of Union Square Ventures

A tag has been placed on Union Square Ventures requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Pollytyred (talk) 16:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser

Hi,

I have approved you for AutoWIkiBrowser. You can get to work immediately (you can download it from here). Good luck!

  jj137 (talk) 23:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Transwiki to a more inclusive site

Hi Gary,

I see that you've been very active in Wikipedia, and as some of your articles are currently under review for deletion on the grounds of non-notability, I wanted to suggest that you consider transferring them to Wikipopuli, a wiki that I set up to host biographical articles without a notability requirement. Indeed, given your level of experience in the wiki world, I'd be grateful for any feedback you care to give on the site. Thanks TheYellowCabin (talk) 15:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I guess you didn't like my suggestion. I didn't mean to offend you or imply and denigration of your work. If you don't mind I'd like to explain myself in a little more detail. I created the Wikipopuli website to be a potential home for Wikipedia bio articles that fall afoul of WP:BIO. (As well as any biographical material that people would like to put up on their own.) I've been visiting the talk pages of users who have created articles undergoing AfD for non-notability and suggesting that they transwiki such articles to Wikipopuli. While I can see how you might perceive this as using Wikipedia to promote another site, I was hoping that my intentions would be seen as wiki-friendly in that I'm helping frustrated users find a new home for their content, while Wikipedia is kept free of material that editors deem unsuitable. In short, I'd value your advice and guidance on how best to proceed. I'd like to offer helpful suggestions to those who might benefit, without falling afoul of Wikipedia rules or generally creating a nuisance. TheYellowCabin (talk) 17:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Real Capital Analytics worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you. <3 bunny 19:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you testing

Or do edits like this constitute the final version of the pages you're editing? Also, if you're going to use a semi-automatic tool, please use one that makes the change in one edit. The Evil Spartan (talk) 07:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, let me rephrase this. Your help is invaluable. But please stop using the tool for experimentation until you have it perfected. Use the sandbox if necessary. The Evil Spartan (talk) 08:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Categorising Singapore Youth Flying Club

Thanks for helping! Bonchygeez (talk) 15:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Evermail, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified. If it has not been already, it may be removed if the category has not been deemed correct for the subject matter. Thank you. Evermail is NOT an English word. It is a neologism, which is why I AfD's it. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Hoosier Crossroads Conference, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified. If it has not been already, it may be removed if the category has not been deemed correct for the subject matter. Thank you. This is a conference in the sense of "group", not in the sense of "meeting". Are you reading the articles before tagging, or is this some kind of bot? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Guild of Italian American Actors, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified. If it has not been already, it may be removed if the category has not been deemed correct for the subject matter. Thank you. Italian-American is explicitly NOT Italian. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Graphics coordinator, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified. If it has not been already, it may be removed if the category has not been deemed correct for the subject matter. Thank you. Not a TV series. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Categorization

Hello. I see that you've become a categorization machine! Alai has promised to run his bot on the latest database dump so we'll probably get a few thousand new entries to play with. Now we know how Sisyphus felt. I sort of feel like a dick for pointing this out, but I feel that you're categorizing things too fast. For instance, make sure that when categorizing people you include them into the XXXX births, XXXX deaths or Living people categories. While these often seem useless, they are in fact routinely used by Wikipedia bots for various maintenance tasks. Also, in a few cases, you have used categories which are too high level like Category:Writers, Category:Albums, [Category:Hungarian people]. Of course, these are better than nothing but such articles are likely to remain in Wikipedia nowhere land until they are re-categorized down the road. If you're unsure about how to get more precise cats, you can add Category:Better category needed or put a question at WP:UNCAT. The objective is not to quickly get rid of the backlog (there will always be a backlog, no matter how fast we work: its limited size is in large part due to bot operators unwilling to dump a ton of articles in it) but rather to make sure that articles we categorize are sufficiently well classified to be accessible for bots and interested readers or writers. Again, sorry if it feels like I'm lecturing. Feel free to let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 18:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to General Treviño, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified. If it has not been already, it may be removed if the category has not been deemed correct for the subject matter. Thank you. Not a ranch. Your bot doesn't work. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Adding Inappropriate Categories

I'm not sure what you're doing, but it doesn't seem to be helpful. Some recent questionable changes:

• Debbie Meyer Green Bags is an article about plastic bags, so why would you add (Category: Cooking appliance brands) to it?
• Dave Celentano is indeed a guitarist, since he is a guitar instructor, but the article is clearly CSD#G11, so why wouldn't you tag it while you're in there?
• Daraja Academy is a school in Kenya, so why tag it as (Category: Non-profit organizations based in the United States)?

If you are running a bot to do this, it needs to be shut down immediately. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't mean those as rhetorical questions. Please respond. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Those were automatic edits. I have rectified the situation and will manually observe the edits before they are made from now on. --Gary King (talk) 22:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

So you were running an unregistered bot to categorize articles? Is this a fair statement? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

If that is indeed what is happening then a) please stop because it's hurting the project more than it's helping and b) please generate a list of all articles you categorized with the bot so that we can rectify the problem. Pichpich (talk) 23:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

By my rough estimation you have made around 2000 edits related to categorization in the past two weeks, roughly 75% of these to distinct pages. That's still around 1500 pages and a quick spot check has me convinced that all of these need to be double-checked for improper categorization, insufficient categorization or clear candidates for deletion which have flown under the radar as a result of the bot. I cannot stress enough that categorization is most certainly not something that should be automated. I could not care less about whether or not the bot was authorized but this really, really needs to stop and you have to figure out a way to generate a list of articles so that the WP:UNCAT team can fix the problems. If you cannot do that, I'll have to request a bot to automatically rollback your edits of the past two weeks. Pichpich (talk) 23:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... How long have you been doing this? [1]? Pichpich (talk) 23:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Speaking for myself, I do care if it was an unauthorized bot. Gary, please give a clear answer to my earlier question. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't a bot. At the most, it was a Wikipedia edit form that wasn't on en.wikipedia.org and still requires a human to hit the Submit button for each change. --Gary King (talk) 03:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I can't reconcile your latest statement with your earlier statement "Those were automatic edits. I have rectified the situation and will manually observe the edits before they are made from now on". I would leave you and User:Pichpich to work out how to repair the damage you have done, except I see that you are still doing it. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 05:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop

Hello. I am flabergasted that despite the complaints above you've decided to continue running a bot-like process that hurts the categorization process. Please stop now or I will request that your account be blocked. Pichpich (talk) 02:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not a bot; it returns the articles that require categories and I go through each one and give them a category. If you look at the latest articles that I have categorized, you'll see that they have appropriate categories added to them. --Gary King (talk) 02:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Look, the fact remains that you have categorized hundreds if not thousands of articles so carelessly that the work has to be redone. So please, help me and others find a solution. If need be, I'll manually revert all article changes you've made in that categorization blitz. I'm sure you meant no harm but the fact is you screwed up and the quicker we can fix this the better. Pichpich (talk) 04:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Man, the more I look into this the more absurd this gets. People have been telling you for at least 6 months that you're being too careless with categorization and your solution is to use a semi-automated process to do more careless work more quickly? What gives? You need to take a deep, deep breath and come clean so that we can repair the damage. Pichpich (talk) 05:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Please follow various people's advice and stop doing this until its appropriateness can be reviewed. Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 05:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Incident Report

Please see ANI. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 05:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Again, it would be very nice of you to comment on the ANI thread. Your unresponsiveness will leave no other choice but to block your account. Pichpich (talk) 17:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't know I was supposed to respond to it; I'll do so immediately. --Gary King (talk) 17:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Category:American musical groups

Please be aware, that this is a parent category and should not be used to categorise articles. Please use more specific categories, which can be found within Category:American musical groups by genre. Cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 08:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

What are you doing now? ARV notice

I've ARV'd you since you appear to be using a bot to reverse your previous edits, without having previously agreed this anywhere that I have seen. I doubt you will be blocked, but I wanted to let you know I'd done this. Your actions are very puzzling to me. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I assumed that this would be worked out with admins before proceeding, but you are right, User:Pichpich did say that. Personally, I think more caution is warranted, and given the trouble that has already been caused, I would still suggest waiting for more input. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

• Perhaps you should update the ANI with details of what you're doing. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Protection templates

Please do not add protection templates to articles that are not protected as you did here and here. Nor should you remove protection templates to articles that are indeed protected as you did here. Normally, an admin who does an article protection will add the template themselves. For expired protection templates, there is a bot that handles that task so there is often no need for you to remove it. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

WOT

It's true, some people do use WOT to mean what... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.238.64 (talk) 17:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Archive Problem

Just want to let you know that something seems to have gone wrong with your archiving process. Archive 8 is empty (I think this diff is the relevant one). It's your talk page, but it may be helpful to have that info for anyone who is following the ANI entry. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Porphyria's Lover

You reverted my edit, calling it "vandalism". Might i ask why? 81.140.99.185 (talk) 11:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Please reference the claims that you make in your addition, otherwise it is simply speculation. Gary King (talk) 11:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI

Hello. Just letting you know: Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 43#Bot needed to repair mistakes of unauthorized bot. Feel free to comment. Pichpich (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Darfur Peace Agreement

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Darfur Peace Agreement, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/KHII-6PM57E?OpenDocument. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

It's public domain :) I mention this on your Talk page. Gary King (talk) 05:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Cherepovets article. I didn't realize I need to put a reason for edit, and I don't know how to do this after the fact. Thanks for educating, I will do this next time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.150.143 (talk) 07:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:JUSTAVOTE

You might want to read that... --Closedmouth (talk) 09:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I was not aware. I'll abide by that from now on.Gary King (talk) 09:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I don't mean to discourage you in any way, I just thought you might like to know. --Closedmouth (talk) 09:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Heart (band)

Thank you. (I couldn't work out if there was some perverse logic behind it, or if it was just simple vandalism! You have saved me from further mental effort ;-) Pdfpdf (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Finding vandalism

Lupin's anti-vandal tool is very effective for filtering out bad edits. It can be hard to keep up with at times. --Closedmouth (talk) 11:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

AFD

You passed comment in an AFD, but seem to have put your comment on the main AFD page rather than the appropriate subpage, it's not easy to see which AFD this relates to, so I've just removed it for now. Can you readd it to the appropriate place if still needed? Thanks. --81.104.39.63 (talk) 12:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your comments. Please note that on Wikipedia, consensus is determined by discussion, not voting, and it is the quality of arguments that counts, not the number of people supporting a position. Consider reading about the deletion policy for a brief overview for the deletion process, and how we decide what to keep and what to delete. We hope you decide to stay and contribute even more. Thank you! Just saying "Delete" with no reason attached to it is considered bad form. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 15:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Just A Vote

Hi, I noticed most of your comments on the AfD pages are WP:JUSTAVOTE, let us know what you're thinking! Thanks -Kevinebaugh (talk) 15:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Account

Hi, thanks for the message. I do actually have an account (unused for 6 months or so), I just had to stop actively editing wikipedia for various personal reasons (Change of job, illness and various other bits and pieces). I still don't really have that much time to contribute so I'm just feeling the water so to speak. --81.104.39.63 (talk) 17:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA Card

My RFA →→→

Dear Gary King, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind vote on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (29/5/5).

I cannot thank you enough for you're support on my RFA. And now that I am a sysop, I will work hard to improve the encyclopedia with my new editing tools. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.

Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. — Chetblong^{T C} 20:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete of Brian Telestai

A tag has been placed on Brian Telestai, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

I Am Ghost is notable, but he isn't outside of the band. Most of this article is about the band, in an attempt to assert notability.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. ~kevin ^talk_email 21:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Nousernamesleft

Hi, Gary King, thanks for voting in my RfA, which passed with 47 supports (I hoped for a perfect square, but two away is close enough!), 3 opposes (the first odd prime), and 0 neutrals. I'm glad the community has decided to trust me with the mop and bucket (the flamethrower isn't supported). Of course, special thanks goes to my nominators Auawise and that one guy who buried stuff (not that the thanks I give to the you isn't special!). If you ever need a hand with something, or just want to say hello, tough feel free to drop a line! Best wishes, Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 23:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC) This doesn't even vaguely resemble a mop, but I couldn't find a picture of one.

I can has thankspam?

Quick, let's delete the front page!

No seriously, thanks for contributing at my RfA which ended 68/0/0. I'm amazed and humbled by the result, and the warm and supportive comments that went with it. I've put the pic of Tiger here because although I know not everyone appreciates lolcats, to me it illustrates the possibility of taking things seriously with a light heart. I will try to do so, and remain open to the being slapped down if I do start being impossibly pompous. Thanks Pedro :  Chat  for your generous nomination, and also to Master of Puppets for ripping off his thankspam without so much as a by-your-leave. To all who contributed - especially the eventually withdrawn (but very interesting) neutral and oppose - thank you! Now it's off to new admin school for me, before I dare do anything for real... Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: (User talk:ais523) User:Ais523/stubtagtab2.js

Thanks for letting me know! It seems that there was a change in the API that removed the API call the script used to use, replacing it with a newer one. I think I've updated it to use the newer method; bypass your cache, and let me know whether it works now. --ais523 13:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

New articles

Please help... its quite easy. Not sure adding a cleanup box to a one minute old article is very helpful. Victuallers (talk) 15:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:Article Creation

Hello, you can find the discussion here. Icestorm815 • Talk 19:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Marys dog

I think it would be safe to tag this for speedy under notability or even advertising. Google turns up nothing but a MySpace and another questionable source. Fléêťflämẽ U-T-C 22:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page. Fléêťflämẽ U-T-C 22:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

AFDs

Could you possibly slow down with the AFDs? Many of those articles could probably be salvaged, but we don't have enough time to do the research if you're nominating several every hour. Thanks, Zagalejo^^^ 23:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Zagalejo. I do, however, appreciate your comitment to clean up Wiki. Scipio Carthage (talk) 22:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

In all fairness, the majority are either deleted, on their way to being deleted, or are because I was not completely aware of the policies for certain types of articles, like radio stations or schools. Once I submitted an article for AFD and realized this mistake, I stopped submitting these types of articles. Look at my AFDs from my first ones and move forward through time and you will realize this. Gary King (talk) 01:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Go To Berlin

We created this page today, and read the terms. We would like to dicuss this further as we feel that although we do not meet all the requirements in a short period of time we may manage to meet them all.

If you aren't sure about an article...

If you aren't sure whether an article should be kept or not, consider improving it youself, or tagging it as {{Unreferenced}} or {{Notability}}, or whatever the main problem seems to be, and perhaps another editor will be able to improve the article. Only take an article to AfD if you are sure that it should be deleted. --Eastmain (talk) 02:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

right. It helps to be able to say where you have looked for sources, ad failed to find them. See WP:Deletion policy. Eastmain & I certainly often dont agree about deletions, but we --and others-- do agree you are not doing this carefully enough. DGG (talk) 09:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Dutch Pop

I declined the CSD. A7 only applies to articles on people and organizations, not genres of music. Suggest AfD. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 07:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Dave best

Just saw your AfD notice on my talk page - actually I did not create the Dave best article - I just tidied it up a little. I see that someone has attempted to redirect to the band article -- I'll fix that and all should be good.--ukexpat (talk) 17:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Glabrousness, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. WAS 4.250 (talk) 19:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

OhanaUnited's RFA

.: Thank you! :.

Thank you for participating in my 2nd RfA and supporting me! My RfA passed unanimously at 79 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral. I would like to take this opportunity to thank AndonicO and Rudget for nominating me. I also want to thank LaraLove for persuading me to keep going after I failed my first RfA. To be really honest, I am surprised that my RfA passed without any oppose or neutral. Being an administrator means more responsibilities, especially when I'm now an administrator on both English Wikipedia as well as WikiSpecies. I promise everyone that I will use the tools effectively to serve the community. If you need help on anything, don't hesitate to leave me a message on my talk page and I will get back to you as soon as possible. Last but not least, remember the motto for Ohana: "When it comes to family, nobody gets left behind." Once again, thanks for placing your trust in me to help the community. OhanaUnitedTalk page 18:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Confused

Hello. I'm confused by this edit and the edit summary that went with the edit. At first glance it seems like the edit summary and the edit are incongruous. Let me know what you think; thanks. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 20:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I also see that you closed the AFD as a non-admin on an AFD that wasn't obviously a keep or a delete. Can you please explain why you closed it as "keep"? Thanks. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 20:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I replied on my user talk page. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 20:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin Closures

Hi. I see you've been helping out on the AFD backlog. That's great, but you need to be a bit more careful with the process. As per WP:DELPRO (and echoed in WP:NAC), the removal of the AFD notice should not be marked with as a minor edit, and in the case of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Owner earnings, it also looks like you missed adding the AFD result to the talk page. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 21:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The 'minor edit' edit summary was pre-populated, and I should have changed it to something more descriptive. You are right. I've also added the AFD result to that Talk page. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 21:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Closure of AFD for Martha Samuelson

Hi. It looks like you left out the addition of the closure notice on the talk pages for articles. I was going through and fixing them when I came across Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martha Samuelson. You closed this as a keep, but there does not appear to be a clear concensus for keep. The nominator, and one other editor indicated Delete (2 !votes delete), and one other editor indicating a redirect or delete. There is one keep, and one weak keep from established editors. And there are two keeps from a single purpose account which should not hold much weight due to the conflict of interest noted with the IP address belonging to the company of the article subject. I don't see how this possibly be considered a clear concensus to delete. And as per WP:NAC, non-admins should leave these for an admin to close. Regards -- Whpq (talk) 11:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I've restored it back to normal. Gary King (talk) 15:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

redoing categorization

Hello Gary King. It's been agreed at Wikipedia:Bot requests that the simplest way to fix the unsatisfactory categorization that you performed automatically is for you to run AWB to tag these articles as Category:Categorization needs to be reviewed which I've just created for this purpose. Can you handle the tagging? Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 17:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I see you've tweaked my message, but I'd also like to know if you'll do it or not. Pichpich (talk) 19:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on a few things right now, including a WP:FAC review, but I'll get right on it ASAP. Gary King (talk) 19:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok great. There's no real rush if you're too busy with the FAC. I just want to know that you'll do it eventually. Pichpich (talk) 22:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Done Gary King (talk) 03:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Milton Friedman

I saw you tried to get Friedman through FA review. I too am interested in making this a featured article. Let me know if you need help working on this. I am pretty busy right now, but I will do what I can. Remember (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Tips

Hi Gary, thanks for promptly addressing my comments. I tend to review FACs from a reference, citation, MOS point of view, so I've largely ignored the prose. The copyediting should take care of any outstanding MOS issues. There are four editors I recommend for review: Karanacs (talk · contribs), Awadewit (talk · contribs), Qp10qp (talk · contribs) and The Rambling Man (talk · contribs). SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs) is excellent for MOS issues, and Pagrashtak (talk · contribs) can advise on the inclusion of fair use images. I've written a few featured articles, so if you want any advice on anything just drop me a line. I look forward to supporting this article, and I see you've got a few editors willing to give you a hand. Best of luck, PeterSymonds | talk 19:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I've archived my comments. PS, Sandy is the Featured Article Director's (Raul654 (talk · contribs)) delegate, ie. she promotes/archives nominations. Therefore she doesn't like to comment on articles that haven't reached a consensus. She recommended Epbr123 (talk · contribs) to review against the MOS instead. PeterSymonds | talk 21:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Alright thanks, I will contact that person. Gary King (talk) 21:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Malaka Dewapriya AfD

Is it OK with you if I bring Sri Lankan Student Short Film culture into the same AfD? It's the same author, same subject, same notability issues. I'm really not sure myself which way I'll vote - there just may be notability lurking under all the promotion (self-promotion, I'm sure), but somebody would have to do a lot of work to get an acceptable article; and the way he is behaving, continually removing the AfD template, he's liable to get blocked soon. JohnCD (talk) 22:27, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. Gary King (talk) 22:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll wait and see how your speedy goes; if that's turned down, I'll add it to the AfD. JohnCD (talk) 22:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The account has been blocked, too, after I just reported it. Yay, one vandal down, many more to go! Gary King (talk) 22:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Milton Friedman review

Hello Gary! Interested to hear that I've been recommended as a reviewer, but glad to be of service where possible! I'm certainly no Nobel prize winning reviewer(!) but I'll definitely give it a go. May be a day or so before I can bring in the full damage but I'll do my best. It looks good from an overview but immediately I'd suggest merging the single sentence para's and using an en-dash to separate year ranges (per the WP:MOS). I'd also avoid bullet point lists as WP:FA tends to shy away from that sort of thing. Anyway, just a quick couple of pointers. As Arnie said.... "I'll be back....." The Rambling Man (talk) 22:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, they are all great suggestions. I will go through each one and make sure that they are carefully applied to the article. Gary King (talk) 23:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks like things have taken a funny turn - a {{POV}} template has been added to the page which, until its resolution, means the FA is doomed. I suggest you work with the editor(s) who take objection to elements of the article as it currently stands and hopefully resurrect the chance of promotion. Otherwise I fear the worst.... Bearing in mind I'm no subject matter expert, let me know if I can help. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

WP: AIV

Hello. I think you might have messed up in a recent WP:AIV report. Malaka Dewapriya, the account you reported, does not even exist. Please fix, and put the correct username. Thanks! - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. Gary King (talk) 22:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

• Did you notice that he has two user names - he started out as Srilanka short film (talk · contribs) and then switched to Srilankan short film (talk · contribs), so if one is blocked you may need to block the other as well. JohnCD (talk) 22:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Good catch - reported the alternative account as well. Gary King (talk) 22:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Milton Friedman

Gary. I'm afraid that article is well outside my area of knowledge (now if it had been Milton!). It looks like it has some reviewers now, so please forgive me if I pass. All the best with it. qp10qp (talk) 00:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Ganzfeld

You've just said delete in this debate, but it is not a vote, so you need to state your reasons for your position to be given weight. Tyrenius (talk) 04:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pál Balkay

Have you read the comments in this debate? You might consider withdrawing your nom, so it can be closed as a speedy keep. Tyrenius (talk) 04:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA

Thanks for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully with 40 supports, 13 opposes, and 4 neutrals. For those of you who supported my RFA, I greatly appreciate it. For those who did not, I'm also thankful for your constructive criticism. If you need some advice or have some pointers for me, you know where to reach me! A special thank you to Majorly for all his time and effort he has placed in my nomination. Once again, thank you all for your helpful comments. Now off to new admin school! Cheers, Icestorm815 • Talk 01:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Gini coefficient

Thanks for assessing this from an economics perspective to add to my assessment from a statistics perspective. It appears you set higher standards for quality than me, or maybe we're judging different aspects, but either way that's fine! Regards, Qwfp (talk) 18:01, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop vandalizing PHP or you will be blocked. --MisterWiki do ya want to speak me?, come there! - 23:08, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok. --MisterWiki do ya want to speak me?, come there! - 23:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Good. --MisterWiki do ya want to speak me?, come there! - 23:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

PHP review

No prob. I'm off out today so if I don't finish the review before I leave then I'll finish it tonight. Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 08:24, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

PR script

I've made a modified script in User:Jwanders/monobook.js that works for me. Just don't use the "Autoformat article per MOS" button. --jwanders^Talk 18:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I've copied it over to another page for now since yours is on your monobook.js page and you might change it later on. It works for me. Gary King (talk) 21:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Harry Girvetz redirect?

I noticed that you recently created a redirect page for Harry Girvetz, pointing to Milton Friedman. From what I can tell via Google, Harry Girvetz (1910-1974) was a professor of philosophy at UC Santa Barbara and a liberal activist. There is no mention of him on Milton Friedman's page. I'm puzzled by the redirect. Kestenbaum (talk) 07:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

His name must've been removed from the article, then. Anyways, I would consider the person non-notable enough to deserve his own article. It was a red link, so I redirected it back to the only article that linked to it. Gary King (talk) 20:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Student Short Film Culture in Sri lanka

Our friend is back, as Malakadew (talk · contribs). I have put {{uw-coi}} on his talk page, but haven't got time to do anything else about it just now. JohnCD (talk) 14:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Our friend is now blocked indefinitely (again). Nice catch on your part, once again. Gary King (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

He has introduced another of his films Transference-short film which I have AfD-ed.JohnCD (talk) 22:18, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

François-Marie de Bourbon

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article François-Marie de Bourbon, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of François-Marie de Bourbon. Magioladitis (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: No notification for deleted images

Hi, Gary! When you uploaded the image, you should have seen a large warning that looked like the text at {{AutoReplaceable fair use people}}. However, I've taken a closer look and decided to restore the image since Milton Friedman is deceased. Please write a fair use rationale for the image within the next week. Thanks! east.718 at 01:24, February 25, 2008

Done. Good luck with the article! east.718 at 01:29, February 25, 2008

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 03:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching request

You have previously expressed an interest in undergoing the Admin coaching program. We're currently engaged in a program reset to help things move more smoothly in the future. If you are still interested in the program, please go to Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Requests for Coaching and re-list yourself under Current requests, deleting your entry from Older requests. Also, double-check to make sure coaching is right for you at theCoachee checklist; WP:Adoption or WP:Editor review may be more appropriate depending on your situation and aspirations. We should get back to you within a day or so, once a coaching relationship has been identified. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 07:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching match

Hello, I am pleased to announce that you have been paired with User:Sephiroth BCR as an admin coachee. You now have two important tasks to complete:

1. Introduce yourself to Sephiroth BCR and explain to him why you want to be an admin.

2. Once he has confirmed the relationship to you, edit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Requests for Coaching to move your name to Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to record the match.

Given the limited coaching resources of the Admin Coaching project, if you plan to take a Wikibreak of more than 30 days, please notify your coach or myself so that we will know not to tag you as retired and give your spot to another user. Remember that adminship is not a big deal and that it may take multiple RfAs before one becomes a sysop, even for highly qualified, coached, editors. Also, remember that while admin coaching will help you prepare for the mop, there is no guarantee that completing this program will ensure passage of an RfA.

Congratulations again, and happy editing. MBisanz ^talk 08:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Gary. I would be happy to be your coach for your attempt to become an administrator. Due to the rather late hour here (US Pacific Time), we'll get into the finer points of your contributions and what you should start working on at another time. That said, I'll indulge in a brief review going off your post on my talk page concerning the areas you wish to focus on as an administrator. If you wish to be involved in administrator-related areas such as WP:AIV, WP:AFD, and WP:CSD, my biggest recommendation is simply to start participating in them. Genuine interest and experience are what the people at WP:RFA are looking for, and participation is really the only way to achieve both. For vandal reporting, AfD reporting, and speedy deletion tagging, I've found WP:TWINKLE particularly useful, and would highly advise using it for the aforementioned tasks. How you wish to participate is ultimately up to you and how you wish to apply yourself in this regard. Watching a thread for recent edits, watching Special:Newpages for CSD tagging, or going down the lists of AfDs to participate are general ways to begin applying yourself. Firsthand experience instills more lessons than mere lecturing. Anyhow, I'm off to bed, and I'll get to some other things I want to cover for your future run later. Do be aware that attempting to become an administrator is a time-intensive process, and it may take months and possibly multiple RfA tries (although the latter is what we're naturally trying to avoid here :p) before you actually become an administrator. Don't worry though, a brief look at your edits gives the appearance you're going in the right direction, but I'll delve a little deeper later. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

• I hate to sound like a dick but I suggest that before spending time learning the ins and outs of adminship, your priority should be to repair the categorization problems. Pichpich (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Done Gary King (talk) 03:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Automonomous areas FLC

I'd be delighted to take a look. It may take me a few hours to get on with it but I'll do my best. Cheers for now. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I've had a look. I'm no expert, as I've never had any contact with FL or FLC. It appears to be good, and I've supported based on other lists seen, with some comments that may/may not be helpful. Good luck! PeterSymonds | talk 17:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, it looks good. I've struck my comments and left with support. Good luck! PeterSymonds | talk 18:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support! Now only if more people would even bother to vote; I'm worried that not enough votes will be casted, period, and if it's only yours, then I don't think that's considered a consensus. Gary King (talk) 03:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Malaka

I have been clearing up after Malaka and am in slight doubt at University of Colombo, List of Sri Lankans and Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation where, apart from inserting himself, he has also input other names and material. My instinct is that he is so untrustworthy a source that everything he has done should be reverted - if there are good names and material they can be added back later by someone with less COI; but I thought I would like to check with someone else before pressing the zap button. If you agree with my view above, I will happily go and do it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks - just the advice I wanted. I'll sort them out. I wonder how soon he'll pop up again? JohnCD (talk) 18:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem, glad I could be of assistance. Gary King (talk) 03:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

uncategorized tagging has gone astray..

Please check your AWB session, you are double tagging, and tagging pages that are already categorized.. (some are fine, but I'm seeing a lot of errors) -- Versageek 01:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I realize that. It was the pattern I was using in AWB; I'm doing a second run to rectify the ones that were edited on first run. Gary King (talk) 01:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Here is a Redirect you broke by marking Uncategorized [2], redirects should not be in categories to begin with. MBisanz ^talk 01:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, whoopsie doodle! That one fell under the radar. Won't happen again. Gary King (talk) 03:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Map creator

Good question, I'm not sure; there doesn't appear to be a WikiProject for maps. I suggest you ask User:Dark512 on the Wikimedia Commons, who made the map for the autonomous countries. PeterSymonds | talk 07:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

There is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps and I've requested for an image there, but I feel that it will just fall through the cracks. I was going to ask Dark512, but the user has not been active since mid-2007. I'll give it a shot, anyways. Gary King (talk) 07:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I know you're busy with admin coaching, but I thought I might suggest one other thing. The maps WikiProject has a number of images by users, so it might be an idea to approach them directly (the talk page is, to say the least, backlogged). If you approach, say, 5, at least 1 might be able to do one. Thought I'd throw that into the melting pot as it were, but you may've already considered that. Best, PeterSymonds | talk 22:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Good idea, I will give it a shot. Gary King (talk) 04:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments from your coach

Well, I promised you a more thorough review, so here you go. I'm primarily going to stick with the three points you set out at my talk page since you've set them as your primary targets, and with all three, you have all you need for an RfA. Anyways, here it is:

• Category Tagging/Assessment

Your efforts here have been rather impressive to say the least. A lot of administrator-related work is clearing backlogs and other thankless jobs, and your ability to show willingness to attend to such widespread problems such as adding/fixing categories and assessing articles shows as such. I don't indulge in either very much, but I can point to the positive benefits of doing so. I can't really say anything than continue doing it. You might need a bit more care while going through a such a pace (adding categories to redirects for instance), but good job regardless.

• Vandal fighting/AfD participation/CSD tagging

Per my above post, the best way to show interest in the above items is to participate in them. When you say at your RfA (required question 1 to be exact) that you want to participate at WP:AIV, WP:AFD, and CAT:CSD, you want contributions to back it up. My primary and foremost recommendation here, however, is complete and utter dedication to civility. The easiest way for a RfA to be sunk is civility concerns, and a large majority of the people looking at your RfA will oppose if they feel you do not possess the proper "temperament" to be an administrator. Naturally, the opposite is true. Civility in the face of insults, threats, and otherwise stressful situations is an extremely nice item to have, and past sins, blunders, and whatnot are often forgiven if this is the case. I bring up civility here because it plays into all these activities, and goes along with the principle of assume good faith (another necessary item).

• When vandal fighting (I'll assume you're using WP:TWINKLE), use the "rollback (vandalism)" item (or the rollback function you have) solely when dealing with blatant and obvious vandalism. If you're unsure, use the regular "rollback" function and leave an edit summary explaining the rationale for your revert. Do not ever, ever label a content dispute as "vandalism" unless it is blatant vandalism. Revert once, and if concerns persist, bring it to discussion. If the other editor is going to be an ass about it, then let WP:CONSENSUS sort him/her out. Having the page at the wrong or incorrect version for a short duration of time is not the end of the world by any means. In cases of genuine content disputes though, I would recommend discussion first, but if you do feel that you are correct, use the "rollback (AGF)" option (use it a lot, almost go out of your way to assume good faith). Naturally, this does not mean you have to be "soft" on vandalism by any means. Aggressively reverting vandalism is certainly nice, but taking special care with your edits, especially in cases of content disputes, is the thing you should be implementing. On the subject of edit summaries, try the best you can to keep 100% edit summaries. It's one of the reasons I like TWINKLE, and I do highly recommend keeping 100% edit summaries (you appear to be doing so anyways).
• For AfD, the biggest two things you can show are civility and knowledge of policy. Adverse opinions are frequently present at AfD, and maintaining civility and an open mind are great things to have. For whatever discussion you're involved in, check the relevant notability guideline, its criteria, and make use of them in your opinions. For me, the most frequent guideline I am using due to the articles I commonly edit is Wikipedia:Notability (fiction), which stipulates that merging should be a venue sought before actual deletion is warranted. For instance, if a character of a work was given their own article while a character list existed for that work, and the character did not warrant an article, merging to the character list would be appropriate. Given your focus on Economics and Computer Science articles, you likely will rarely encounter this guideline in your AfD discussions, but it does illustrate using the nuances of guidelines in your opinion.
• CSD tagging is more or less another way to show your knowledge of policy. Memorizing WP:CSD is largely in your best interests, and knowing how to apply them is necessary. For instance, check which articles you can tag with A7; you can't tag a fictional character, even if it asserts no notability, as it doesn't fall under A7's purview. In cases where it is uncertain whether speedy deletion is warranted, it's probably better to WP:AGF and move on. If you're really worried about the article, keep tabs on it, and prod or AfD it at a later date if you feel it is appropriate. Prodding is generally acceptable for new articles (for instance, that non-notable piece of fiction you couldn't get for A7), but never use an AfD on a very new article, as it is seen as an immediate assumption of bad faith, especially considering that the creator has had hardly enough time to flesh out a page. This applies to speedy tagging as well. You are naturally free to be bold in your tagging, but remember that the articles you're tagging should be fairly clear-cut. If an article asserts an iota of notability, don't tag it with A7. Civility also comes into play when you encounter users that use {{hangon}} and attempt to state a rationale for keeping their article. More often than not, you're dealing with a relatively new editor. Calmly explain why you are tagging the article, and if possible, suggest means of improvement. Administrators will not delete an article with a hangon tag unless it is blatantly in violation of policy (an attack page for instance). I stress that speedy deletion tagging is a double-edged sword much more than vandal fighting or AfD participation. While you can clearly demonstrate policy knowledge and the ability to properly converse with the editors creating the page, it can backfire if your tagging is consistently poor. That said, if you feel you know the criteria well, fire away. Experience gives you a better illustration of what I'm talking about then words. Don't feel discouraged though. This is one of the most difficult tasks for prospective administrators, but take it at the pace you feel you can.

• Article Writing

Ah, something I'm rather experienced in, no? Article writing is what we're all here for, and nothing else shows a more comprehensive knowledge of guidelines or policy than writing decent articles because it's the reason we're all here and most of the aforementioned guidelines and policies are geared towards articles. If you look at my RfA, the biggest thing I was praised for was my article contributions. Even though my speedy tagging was a bit lacking at the time, I still received the support of a prominent editor (User:Pedro) for my article contributions (and answers to the questions, but that's another topic for another time). Again, my interests do not correlate with yours (anime, manga, and video games are my niche), but the general principles are still the same. What you chose to contribute to in terms of articles is up to you, but I can attest than out of all my article contributions, the FLs took the least amount of work, the GAs next, and the FAs were a royal pain. All of this is naturally subject to exceptions (Naruto: Clash of Ninja was rather easy to write and bring to GA for instance, and the difficulty of making an FL increases or decreases dramatically depending on what type of list you're creating. List of characters in Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow and Dawn of Sorrow was far more difficult to produce than say Soma Cruz), but it generally holds true. As you haven't brought a lot of articles through the relevant processes, I'll give a few pointers on each.

• Good Articles - WP:WIAGA is the relevant criteria, and the biggest thing to be aware of is that the comprehensiveness, prose, and degree of referencing are much, much less stringent than the FA criteria, and you can often get away with some problems in the article's structure or prose (especially the latter). That said, my foremost recommendation is simply to get the content on the page, and start working from there. When working on articles, especially when it involves creating them or making major edits to them, I highly advise working on them in your userspace first (for instance, for Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow, I worked on the article at User:Sephiroth BCR/Aria of Sorrow Draft), where you are free to work on it at your leisure, and the stress level is much lower. Again, get the content on the page and then you can start working with the prose, WP:MOS issues, and other stuff. I will note that making sure that your references are properly formatted (using {{cite web}} and {{cite book}} for instance) is a huge plus that will save you problems in the future. The thing about WP:GAN is that the difficulty ranges widely depending on the reviewer, but generally, most reviewers are pretty nice about their review, and if there are problems, they will give a nice list of what you need to address. Work with their suggestions, be nice to them, and they'll go your way.
• Featured Lists - ah, my most numerous set of achievements (I currently rank second amongst all Wikipedians in terms of featured lists produced). The biggest two items with the list you're producing is that it has to be comprehensive (including all items), and the format has to be aesthetically pleasing, easy to navigate, and otherwise accessible to the reader (WP:WIAFL for the relevant criteria). The former item can be resolved through researching your subject and including all relevant information, and the latter often through looking at articles of similar status for how they did it. Most types of lists tend to have relatively consistent formats, and modeling lists after one another is commonplace. The reviewers at WP:FLC are quite knowledgeable about formatting issues, and you'll get them resolved if you follow their instructions. If you're ever confused, simply ask them for clarification or even for their aid. Practically all of them would be happy to oblige - they want to see your list be featured, but at the same time, they want to uphold standards. It's always in your interest to work with them.
• Featured Articles - hell so to speak. WP:WIAFA is the criteria you're looking at, and I would highly recommend bringing the article through GA before FAC simply because you're getting another set of eyes on the article first. Peer review has largely deteriorated into nothing more than an automated bot giving suggestions (which is useful, but you want a live person reviewing your article). The most important criterion you're going to find you have to fulfill is 1a, which stresses that the prose must be "engaging, even brilliant, and of professional standard." Your article can be perfect in every way but the prose (and have only one oppose over the matter) and still be sunk. User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a is the designated reading for 1a, but more often that not (unless you're a particularly good writer), you'll find yourself looking for a copy-editor to fix up your article. WP:LOCE is the relevant place, but its requests page is horrifically backlogged, and your request will never be reached before your FAC nomination concludes. As such, you should request a copy-edit by going to individual editors. The members list of LOCE are good people to get copy-editing from, or someone else you are familiar with. I stress 1a here more than the other concerns because generally, you have fulfilled all of them before coming to FAC via going through GA first (unless you had a rather easy reviewer), and if there are problems, you likely resolve them with little difficulty. The only one to note is 1b, as occasionally, GA reviewers will pass an article that is not fully comprehensive. Going to the relevant WikiProject or looking at similar articles of FA quality can resolve this. With all this said, my statements concerning WP:FLC are true here as well - your reviewers have a genuine desire to see your article pass. Work with them, act civilly to their objections, and you'll have no problems. Also note that after addressing an objection, leave a note on the talk page of that reviewer to come back and comment whether their concern was addressed. Having your FAC sunk (I've had it happen before) because the person who opposed or commented on some aspect of the text never came back is really annoying. This all said, FAs are more or less the easiest ways to gain prestige here, as they combine practically all elements of being an editor in the production of an article to the highest quality, and being heavily involved in the production of one is major kudos, especially at an RfA.
• Featured Topics - I won't go here, likely because it's a rather lofty goal to produce a featured topic on your own, but if that does become the case, I'll be more than happy to show you through the nuances of the process. Again, I received significant amount of support during my RfA because I happened to have a pair of featured topics (Naruto manga chapters and Seasons of YuYu Hakusho), and it just illustrates how beneficial having significant article contributions is at RfA.

In any case, I'm rather tired at the moment, but I think I've addressed the major three points you want to become involved in. I am a firm believer in having a hands-off policy in terms of coaching and mentorship, and will largely leave you to your own devices in terms of how you wish to conduct yourself. Naturally, I am open to your concerns, questions, and thoughts of any kind, but I will not badger you to do anything, ask why you haven't cranked out an FA yet, or something similar. We're all volunteers here and your time is yours to use as you wish, and mine to respect. Anyhow, if you want clarification on any of the above, I will be more than happy to give it. Cheers and best of luck, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 10:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks =) A note on giving warnings for vandalism, generally try to start with {{Template:uw-test1}} or {{Template:uw-vandalism1}}, as they are generally "friendly warnings" to stop. If the vandalism is rather clear, then {{Template:uw-vandalism2}} is appropriate. Starting with higher levels generally isn't recommended, as it goes against the spirit of WP:AGF. There are cases where immediately giving {{Template:uw-vandalism4im}} is warranted (massive WP:BLP violation, en mass blanking, etc.) but they tend to be quite rare. Generally, work your way up from the smaller warnings to the larger ones.

As for your question, it depends greatly on the featured list or featured article you're trying to create. I tended to work on practically all my featured lists and featured articles in my userspace, where I could work at my leisure. Lists for me varied a lot. At times, I could crank one out in a day or two, while taking a week or so for others (nomination process is at minimum ten days, but almost always goes on longer). On average, about three to four days. On the other hand, List of characters in Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow and Dawn of Sorrow was a long, time intensive process that spanned practically my entire Wikipedia "career" to produce. Naturally, I wasn't working on it at all times, but I brought it through WP:GAN, WP:FAC, and finally WP:FLC (it was originally classified as an article, and then reclassified as a list at the FAC, hence why I went to FLC). Featured articles take quite a while. Remember that you're near-constantly working on the article even after getting the content on the page (ranges depending on the availability of your sources and content, anywhere from two weeks to a month or even two months is possible) due to copy-editing concerns, near-constant self-evaluation and reading of the article, and calling in others to help you with the article. For Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow, I finished my draft of the article in about a week (in actuality a month or so, but this was sporadic editing over this time). The draft went onto the article on December 18, I got it to GA on January 9 (varies depending how long it takes to get a reviewer, as WP:GAN tends to be rather backlogged), sent to FAC, which failed on February 1 due to the editors who commented not returning to confirm whether their concerns were addressed), and then passed on February 15 on the second FAC try. The major waiting is thus not in the article production (although this is where most of the effort is involved), but getting through the nomination process, which is time-consuming. If you go directly to FAC and pass, you're looking at best three to four weeks between start of production and your shiny featured star, but two months is more realistic. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: Map image for List of unrecognized countries Wikipedia article

Sorry, but i haven't time to do that.

Sorry for my poor english, i am spanish.

Dark512 (talk) 14:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Entourage episodes (season 2)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of Entourage episodes (season 2), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: List of Entourage episodes. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Entourage episodes (season 3)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of Entourage episodes (season 3), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: List of Entourage episodes. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Entourage episodes (season 4)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of Entourage episodes (season 4), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: List of Entourage episodes. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Entourage episodes (season 1)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of Entourage episodes (season 1), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: List of Entourage episodes. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Map image for List of unrecognized countries Wikipedia article

OK then I'll create the map of the unrecognized countries, but I will do so if you tell me the countries in the world which arent recognised because I have no idea who are they are :), so please reply back to this message with the list of countries then I'll try to create the map, Thankyou. Moshino31 (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick notice, what three colours do you want for your map then?

Moshino31 (talk) 17:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

- Sorry for the notice but I cannot seem to access the Paint software at the moment for some reason so I cannot create the map, may I suggest you to create yourself I'll give you the steps in order to create the map, yes?? Moshino31 (talk) 17:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

- OK then first go to, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BlankMap-World.png Once you're there click the map to go into the commons file. You will then have a larger version of the map which you can zoom in/out - copy that 'larger' image, then open up the software Paint, then enter the colours you want on the country by using the 'bucket'. < If this didnt help please say so! Thanks Moshino31 (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: GH3 GA pass

No problem man. It was a great article. ^Mitch32^contribs 22:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Kingjames813

I'm just curious but did you block User:Kingjames813 because the user vandalized my User page? Gary King (talk) 23:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, he was clearly a vandal only account. And it's not nice to replace peoples' talk pages with insults ;-) - Do you disagree with my block, friend? Take care! Scarian^{Call me Pat} 23:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

You've been here 3 years and you've never been vandalised before?! Hehe, if you wanna be a vandal hunter/admin, get used to it :-D Take care, friend! Scarian^{Call me Pat} 23:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:List of countries without armed forces

Looks good. I did a little copy-editing. My only concern is that the statement concerning Haiti is confusing. Is the Haitian National Police viewed as too big, or the paramilitary forces? More clarification would be nice in the text. Other than that, it looks ready for a FLC nom. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 03:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

That looks fine. Nominate it at your leisure. =) Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 03:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I had a look this morning but was away most of the day. It's great! Looks really good on the page as well. I like the references section in the separate column (providing all the information in the row is covered by the same reference). I'd be happy to support at FLC. Well done! PeterSymonds | talk 16:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

How to create maps from blank world maps

OK then first go to, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BlankMap-World.png Once you're there click the map to go into the commons file. You will then have a larger version of the map which you can zoom in/out - copy that 'larger' image, then open up the software Paint and paste it in, then enter the colours you want on the country by using the 'bucket'. < If this didnt help please say so! Thanks

Moshino31 (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

VeblenBot for economics project

Sorry for the delay in responding to your note about VeblenBot. I don't mind setting up something for the economics project, but I think you might be satisfied with this table made by the WP 1.0 bot. If that isn't what you're looking for, let me know, and we can figure out how to implement it. — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I used the intersection categories you made as link destinations, and created this table: User:VeblenBot/Economics/table:ECONOMICS. I don't currently have the option to hide the unassessed row and column when they are empty. I can hide them permanently, however, if you want. Also, unlike Oleg's code, I don't have an option to let users recreate the table on demand - it would get updated once per day. Will this work? — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad this will work. Please feel free to tweak the formatting and width of the table. Your changes will get overwritten by the bot, but if you let me know how you would like it formatted, I can easily change the format that will be used for the table. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

For your excellent efforts

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For a genuine desire to improve Wikipedia articles and lists, I, PeterSymonds | talk, award Gary King with the Editor's Barnstar

Thank you for your continued efforts in featured list candidates. Featured content is never easy achieve, so I commend your efforts, and hope that you will soon have some featured material to add to your future RfA... Best, PeterSymonds | talk 20:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I've never gotten one of these before, so I don't know what to do with it. I guess I'll hang it somewhere on my User page, then? :) Gary King (talk) 20:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

List of subnational entities

I have created the page at User:Gary King/List of subnational entities. Good luck on restoring the article! If you need anything else, don't hesitate to ask. Malinaccier (talk) 23:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Oops

Looks like we're both changing colours. Will these greens never match? --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not the one that can't color between the lines... :p Gary King (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I changed my green square colour to 00ff00 as you were changing your map to some mucky sort of a green. All yours; you get to decide which green you go with. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Janurary

On "localize comments.js", you wrote "Janurary" instead of "January". Thought you might want to fix it. --Kakofonous (talk) 02:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, although that script was copied from someone else who was no longer maintaining it, therefore not my error :) How did you know about it, anyways? Finding the script useful? Gary King (talk) 03:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I just took a glance at your contribs—wanted to see how the huge total was stacking up :). --Kakofonous (talk) 03:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, a lot of it is by tweaking my JavaScript files - but even that only takes up 100 edits at most. It's definitely not a few thousand :) Gary King (talk) 04:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Reconsideration of Deletion of "Ralph Sperry, Ph.D."

Request for reconsideration of deletion:

Notability was in evidence by the following: Significant newsworthy actions noted in many reliable secondary sources for both hospital closures and for schizophrenia research; In addition there was competition at the highest level of amateur sailboat racing as noted in the NY Times. There were 3 people with arguements to keep plus the author The individuals "voting" for deletion gave no valid or specificly detailed explanations as to why there was not notability; they did not dispute the facts in the article which met notability according biography guidelines: For example one said sailing accomplishments were "grasping at straws" yet it was noteworthy according to guidelines; one person voting for deletion indicated there were no seconday sources which was not correct. You noted that the author "voted" three times, which was correct but done by mistake as acknowledged by the author in the disussion. In any case, notability for inclusion is not based on a vote but rather by the "merits of the arguments, not by counting votes" I don't understand the value of referring to votes when the mert of the arguements are what is determinative. The dimissing of notability out of hand, as some did, without clear arguements that either specifically refute the facts/arguements is not very persuasive especially if there is no reference to specific Wikipedia guidelines for deletion. --Waterwindsail (talk) 01:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

The article's deletion was not up to me. It was a consensus vote; plus, I only nominated the article for deletion. If I didn't, then someone else most likely would have. Anyways, why are you so interested in keeping this article alive? It would appear that you have a personal interest in the article. Gary King (talk) 03:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Unrecognised countries

Hi Gary, sorry I've taken so long to respond to your request. I made a list of things this morning, and went to type them up when I got back this afternoon, but they'd all been picked on! (As well as the more technical requirements about lists which I don't fully understand). I'll support when you've addressed the concerns; again, congrats! PeterSymonds | talk 19:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

As soon as all my concerns are addressed I'll squish my comments into a show/hide section. --Golbez (talk) 22:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You also got to make sure to use the Show preview & when done, then Save page. Seems you kept saving the page every time a small clean-up was done in a very short period of time! That-Vela-Fella (talk) 12:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Again, please use the Show preview button. - Dudesleeper / Talk 19:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Tap, tap. - Dudesleeper / Talk 00:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I try, but a lot of the edits are section edits because of long articles, and I save in order to see my changes reflected in the References section. Gary King (talk) 00:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

S'alright. Thanks for explaining. - Dudesleeper / Talk 00:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

wtf

excuse me but how is my edit on gh3 vandilism it was correct u douche bag —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cameron hanlon (talk • contribs) 01:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It needs to be a verified statement; source the statement or do not enter it. Gary King (talk) 01:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

List of recessions

Oh sorry. Aw, that's half my review gone! :P My excuse is that it's early in the morning here (2:52 GMT). Apologies again (and great list) PeterSymonds | talk 02:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Featured list nominations

My apologies for the late response, I've been rather busy lately. Just to note for the type of lists you've been nominating, the primary issues you are going to find are in the table structure and content, both of which I can unfortunately be of little help to you. I can copy-edit, however, and point out things from an observer's point of view if you wish. The other users you are consulting tend to be more knowledgeable on the subject. This aside, great work. At this rate, you'll beat me in number of featured lists written (meaning I better get off my ass and start writing :p). Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

There are only so many lists I make, though! (Although now that I think about it, there's a list for pretty much anything on here, and if not yet, then I'd just create it myself!) Gary King (talk) 05:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Lists of countries seems to have more than enough. And by all means, fire away. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually I'm getting tired of geography-related articles by now. I want to write some that are more related to my fields of interest (although I would consider myself to be interested in pretty much anything Wikipedia has to offer), especially gaming as that is far more entertaining to edit and I haven't done enough of that. I'm curious to know if you have set your sights on any article for a WP:FA yet? Gary King (talk) 06:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I might go to featured lists and good articles at the moment, although I'm looking around. The Advance Wars series is one that has my notice, considering that I've played all of them (naturally, it's infinitely easier to write the article when you've played the game), and I've just recently finished Assassin's Creed, so I might look at that too. Aside from that, I'm slightly interested in seeing whether I can improve a pair of good articles I've written, Soma Cruz and Alucard (Castlevania), to featured status, seeing that it would "perfect" (meaning making all elements featured) this topic I have at WP:FTC (it will pass as it is, but it would be nice to improve the remaining two to featured status). Writing featured articles is a really, really tiring process, primarily in formulating the research into content and getting that on the page. The two featured articles I currently have were long endeavors in the making, I assure you. That said, I'll probably decide on one in the near future. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I think you're scaring me just a bit away from building WP:FA :) Oh, and I don't quite get WP:FT. What's the point of them? The groupings don't even appear to be highlighted on the article pages, let alone any page but WP:FT itself. I guess the point is so that if someone is reading one of the articles in the topic and decides to click over to another, related article then it will be of a similar quality? That's what it's trying to promote? Gary King (talk) 06:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Better to be forewarned and prepare yourself mentally than have the reality hammer hit (which it did for me while writing Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow). Anyhow, the goal of WP:FT is to show a group of interrelated articles of high quality, with a viewer easily able to access parts of a given topic. It also encourages the improvement of specific topics, which is a good thing. For instance, I created four new articles from List of YuYu Hakusho episodes covering the four seasons partly to have a shot at creating a featured topic. As for visibility, it's accessible from the talk page, see Talk:List of YuYu Hakusho episodes for a link to Seasons of YuYu Hakusho. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image:obamagirlvideo.JPG

Hi, could you please restore this image and I will add a Fair Use Rationale? I was not the original uploader, but I think that the image perfectly illustrates its respective article, and I would like to be given the chance to add a Fair Use Rationale to it. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 15:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I restored it and updated the tag, don't forget to add a rationale or else someone will delete it again. Melesse (talk) 09:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

List of companies by employees

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of companies by employees, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: List of companies by employees (2006). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:37, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Be careful

I was going through your contributions when I noticed this revert. Remember that the definition of vandalism is very strict here, meaning that essentially any edit that attempts to be constructive should receive a measure of good faith. In such cases, leave an edit summary explaining your revert in this case, or in the case of WP:TWINKLE, use the "rollback" or "rollback (AGF)" options. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Fair use

Sure. Fair use images need at least one article to use them in order to be valid. However, you do need to add a fair use rationale explaining its purpose in the article as well as other tidbits (use {{Non-free fair use rationale}}, also means that you need to have a fair use rationale for every article the image is used in) or the image probably will be tagged for deletion. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm asking because the image does not have a fair use rationale; although, the image has been around for nearly 3 years, so I would imagine that someone must have come across it by now and would have tagged it if it wasn't allowed. Gary King (talk) 03:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:FA sourcing

Standards change. That said, not all content necessarily needs to be sourced, and I believe the sources in the "Influence" section validate those statements. Despite this, you should generally try to source everything. Anyhow, g'night. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Redirects

I'm sorry but redirects to user space from article space are not allowed. I think the only exemption is WP:JIMBO which is a somewhat special case. Sam Blacketer (talk) 10:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, alright, I wasn't aware. Go ahead and delete them then :) Gary King (talk) 10:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Questions

I don't quite understand your question regarding List of billionaires (2007). If it's whether you can't source other Wikipedia articles, that's certainly correct per WP:SELF, although I don't see where that is used in the article. As for your rant, it's certainly a sad fact that many key articles one would think indispensable to an encyclopedia aren't getting the attention they deserve, but we're all volunteers, and we each choose to devote our time in our own way. As for List of tallest buildings in Toronto, I'll decline to comment until comments arise, as it's not my area of expertise. If the nomination is lacking for comments for a while, then I'll look back at some previous featured lists of the same type and make my assessment. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

For List of billionaires (2007), I'm talking about the Source column. All the links in that column are Wikipedia articles; would that be acceptable as a minimum to consider as references for each entry in the list? Gary King (talk) 05:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh. I see. I would think a reference linking the person and how he's acquiring the money is necessary. Shouldn't be that difficult. Also note you can make a "General" section in your references if you have a long laundry list that can serve as a citation for all of them, which would mean separating the in-line cites into a "Specific" section. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I've seen that done. I've never done that, but I'll probably end up doing that for the first time for this article. Gary King (talk) 05:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and regarding the volunteer part, yep of course I totally understand that. But, I have seen top-level articles that are Featured Articles, so it's not impossible. I'm guessing those are one in a blue moon, though. I wouldn't have posted the rant in the first place if there wasn't any hope ;) Maybe I'll find the time to spearhead something in that area soon... Gary King (talk) 05:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:FLC

Could you please start using the edit summary "nominating _____" rather than "clean up". Also, you currently have several nominations, so could you please wait until some of them close before you nominate any more? Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I will do that. Gary King (talk) 01:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Unprotect request

Given how busy that page has been in terms of repeated deletion, I would prefer you had a finished draft before I unprotect the page, as vandalism has apparently been pretty rampant there. Just type it up at User:Gary King/List of billionaires (2008), show me your draft, and I'll unprotect the page. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Never mind per below. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Damn, everyone is quick on their feet in the evening... Gary King (talk) 02:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: List of billionaires (2008)

Unprotected. --Allen3 ^talk 02:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Great - thanks! Gary King (talk) 02:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

List of billionaires (2008)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of billionaires (2008), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: List of billionaires (2007). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it's indeed very similar. Creepy... Gary King (talk) 02:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

THE NIGHTINGALE

Hello Gary King,

Thanks for your welcome message.

Are you the holder of "The Nightingale" section, which I have just edited?

Jean de Beaumont

Nope, just wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia! Welcome! Gary King (talk) 16:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

List of autonomous countries now a FL

Congrats! PeterSymonds | talk 18:10, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 18:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

FLs

The FL process is different that the FA process because we don't have a director so the task of closing FLs falls to those that want to do it. Basically one day I just started closing FLs and nobody said I can't, so I kept at it. Right now there are two active closers, and two semi-active so it's not just a one person thing.

And which school do you go to, the prestigious one, or that other one that split off from the prestigious one and nobody has ever heard of? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Haha, ouch. I think I'm talking about the latter then, if the former is the one you're attending ;) Also, could you take a look at the following to see if they are eligible for a promotion? I think they are, but of course, I'd like someone else to take a look and if they feel, promote them: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of countries without armed forces (5 supports, 0 opposes, 7 days ago) and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of unrecognized countries/archive1 (3 supports, 0 opposes, 6 days ago). Neither have had significant opposition; although, I will understand if you feel that they still need to gestate a big longer. Actually, none of my FLCs have any Opposes, but they have longer discussions, so I'm willing to wait longer for them to be promoted, but these two have nearly no issues and the ones that have been brought up have already been resolved. Gary King (talk) 19:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The FLC minimum waiting period is 10 days, so they still have a few days left. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, right, forgot about that. Alright, I'll wait. Gary King (talk) 20:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

First FL

Gary, excellent news! Well done.

		The Original Barnstar
		For your concerted efforts at WP:FLC and on your first successful promotion, I, TRM, award you this shiny barnstar! Keep up the great work....!! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I've added that to my wall. Gary King (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Keep it going and don't hesitate to call on me if you need any help. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome, Gary. It was my pleasure to support your list because you responded to all the comments and suggestions raised on the nomination page promptly and attentively. This is how Wikipedia should work. I wish you a lot of featured content! Andrzej Kmicic (talk) 22:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Congrats and other things

Congrats on your first featured list. You'll have plenty more in very short order =)

In any case, onto you and acquiring a mop. We've basically established your credentials as an editor, considering that you've cranked out more potential featured lists in less than a month than I did in like three, so great work. By all means, keep on going. As for other activities, you participate in anti-vandal work and a fair amount of CSD tagigng, although more of the latter would be nice. You don't have to be constantly tagging - visiting Special:Newpages once in a while is all I ask, although you can certainly do more if you wish. Just remember to read up on WP:CSD, and don't do things such as tagging fictional characters for A7 or inappropriately using A1 or A3. However, what I would like to see is more AfD participation. Similar to the CSD tagging situation, you don't need to go to a list of AfDs at WP:AFD and comment on every single one. Read through them, and comment on the ones you feel comfortable on. My biggest recommendation here is to formulate a concise response that demonstrates your knowledge of policy. Comments such as "per nom" or "per above" show a corresponding lack of understanding of policy. Saying "Delete per WP:WEB. Fails to assert any notability through reliable secondary sources" is far better than merely "Delete per nom." Feel free to take it at your own pace though.

On another note, I'll start to occasionally ask you questions that might come up at RfA, the first of which will be #1-3, the required questions for any prospective administrator. #1 has already been defined really by our first conversation - WP:AFD, CAT:CSD, and WP:AIV. #2 is all those pieces of featured content you're churning out. #3 is hopefully no significant conflicts and merely good shows of civility. Work out a formal response for each question and post it on my talk page. Naturally, it's at your leisure. Don't feel hurried or rushed - we have all the time in the world to formulate good answers to these questions. Feel free to peruse old RfAs for tips on how to construct them also.

Finally, I would recommend filing yourself at Wikipedia:Editor review. Just make sure that you clearly state you want to become an administrator, are being coached, and would like a third party opinion on how you're doing. Traffic there is practically nonexistent, so to garner responses, contacting editors and asking them to make a review is best.

Anyhow, that's it for now. Cheers and good night, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Acid3 on Firefox 3.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Acid3 on Firefox 3.png. 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) 04:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Aria of Sorrow

In each case that I had a draft, I c/p the text in the draft and placed it into the article. In each case, the articles had so little traffic and so few constructive edits that my rewrite was vastly superior to whatever it was replacing. As such, yes, it was more or less building the article "from scratch." If there were other users contributing to the article on a daily basis, then I would probably make the draft more limited - rewriting sections at a time for instance. Another solution would be simply to contact the regular users that edit the article and invite them to work on my draft. What decision you make largely rests on the number of regular edits. If there are one or two, you can invite them to work on the draft, but if there are more than five or so, then it becomes impractical. In all of my cases, there were practically no editors fixing up the article, so I was basically doing it on my own. Hope that answers your question. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Also note that for this AfD you brought up, it is for a very new article. Generally, we allow these articles time to grow as to see whether they meet the relevant notability requirements. If the article isn't valid for CSD tagging or a legitimate prod, then it probably should stay. Feel free to keep tabs on it and nominate it in about 3-4 weeks if notability concerns still persist though. If you do have a concern, however, and there's no speedy criteria that applies, then prod it. An AfD after a contested prod tends to be more legitimate. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I see. Yeah, traffic tends to be a significant figure in the above decision on drafts. Best of luck on the article though. As for the AfD, I deleted it. Use WP:TWINKLE next time for AfD nominations, as it cleanly transcludes it on the relevant AfD list, adds the tag to the page, and simplifies the process. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, when I contacted you before about AfDs, I meant go comment in exiting nominations, not try to find articles to delete. The latter activity tends to lead to significant problems, especially with disruption, and there's a load of relevant stuff you should be aware of before you nominate an article for deletion. For the moment, however, feel free to peruse the lists of AfDs at WP:AFD and comment. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

And also, if a CSD tag is inappropriate, prod the article. WP:TWINKLE gives you the option. Be careful with prodding new articles though - only do it if the article has a blatant reason for being deleted but doesn't fall under any of the speedy deletion criteria. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:DELSORT is the place to go. Note that some WikiProjects may not sort AfDs for their topics, so there might not be any available for your interests. If this is the case, just keep on perusing the lists at WP:AFD until you find one that you are comfortable commenting on. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

As we're both interested in video games, you might want to peruse WP:VG/D. Recommended reading would be WP:NOT#GUIDE, WP:GAMECRUFT, WP:FICT, and WP:NOT#INFO. I can also help you out a lot more with these AfDs. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. To each their own. WP:WEB seems to be the relevant reading for your purposes. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. As a rule of thumb, you generally want to cite guidelines or policies when making your argument. For instance, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cloob, you could have stated:

Delete per WP:WEB. Doubtful that Persian-language sources could be found to assert notability.

This naturally isn't always necessary, but it is good for reviewers at your RfA to know that you're constructing arguments with guidelines or policies in mind. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Facebook

Hi. Thanks for asking me to peer-review Facebook, and also for naming me as a recommended editor for reviews. I actually have never peer-reviewed an article but since you asked, of course I will. Be forewarned, I actually know nothing about these social networking sites, so all I can help with is WP:MOS and such, and making sure everything is correct gramatically etc.

One of the reasons I haven't done PRs or FA reviews is because I feel that I'm not that knowledgeable on a lot of areas, and there's already enough editors who can do the MOS and English stuff fine without me. Lists is a different matter though because usually, these things are easily verifiable and so are simply right or wrong.

Also, I don't know if you were aware, but Wired Magazine had an article on Facebook a couple of months ago. It was all about the history and such. I still have it somewhere I think, so I'll read it, see if anything there is relevent to the article and include it, or you could see if it's at their website. I'll look over the article in an hour or so, unless real world takes over. -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 02:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this the article? Gary King (talk) 04:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's the one -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 04:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Judge Judy.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Judge Judy.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 13:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I reverted this vandalism to previous revision "Because Frank and kyle are awesome at DIMUN" - without looking that previous edit was also vandalism. So thanks for reminding. Best. Atabek (talk) 18:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Time 100.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Time 100.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

List of recessions in the United States

I was going to leave it open a few days because technically it has only been open for nine, and it has unstruck opposition. So a few more days may help in getting that struck. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Elton John.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Elton John.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 05:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Ben Croshaw.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Ben Croshaw.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Yamla (talk) 16:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

If you find that the actual license is different from the one that's on the page, I don't get why you can't just change it? I added 3.0 license when it should have been 2.0 license; I've fixed it now, but again, I don't see why the whole tagging process has to be done when it can be easily fixed and you already spent the time to check the license. Gary King (talk) 16:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I actually didn't see it, I thought it said "all rights reserved". I'm running a fever and should probably sign off from Wikipedia. Sorry. --Yamla (talk) 16:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Looking through your contributions, I see you spend a significant amount of time fighting vandalism. Thank you! Yamla (talk) 16:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Gary King (talk) 17:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

why did you delete my legit edit about Kurt Hahn217.7.211.221 (talk) 19:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

kurt hahn

This can be found in the book:

Kinder sollen sich selbst entdecken: Die Erlebnispädagogik Kurt Hahns

1. ISBN-10: 3828892043
2. ISBN-13: 978-3828892040

could you please add this source, as I am unfamiliar with editing that. Thank you. 217.7.211.221 (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Facebook

I suggest that you can add your crunchbase profile after the Facebook home page. Universal Hero (talk) 21:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

Congratulations on your recent successful WP:FL promotions. You may be interested in taking part in our experimental procedure for the selecting lists of the day and lists of the month at WP:LOTD.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD reconsider

Seeing as this article happened to be on both the deletion lists we watch, you may want to reconsider your stance at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thottbot (2nd nomination). Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 19:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

man calm down this is wikipedia half of this is wrong anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethono21 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Jin

At several sites I've seen, it is confirmed that Jin is a member, and on CTV the episode was promoted as revealing the final two. Besides, since his grave is off the island, then obviously he got off somehow. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Facebook PR

Hi Gary. I've been following the PR, and the progress you've been making, and I'm impressed with how speedily they've been addressed. I'm surprised no one else has commented, but for such a controversial topic, I'd press for at least 3 reviews before GAN/FAC. You might want to ask someone from the volunteers list here or here. PeterSymonds | talk 18:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll be happy to review the article, but it probably won't be until the middle of next week. I hope that's okay. – Scartol • Tok 18:51, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

That's fine. Gary King (talk) 18:51, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I could review this article but I have first got to finish reviewing Crawley, then do Bode and then I could have a look at this. It may be a while... JMiall₰ 01:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. I think it's ready to be taken to GAN; the reviewer will then tell you what s/he thinks needs to be added to get it to FA. PeterSymonds | talk 18:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in Toronto FLC

Hmm, the 9th was the last time that user edited. Can you confirm to the best of your knowledge that you've addressed those concerns? They were mainly about style guidelines, but s/he also mentioned "substance", which was a bit vague! If the style guidelines conform, I think you should add a comment under the oppose and explain that the objections have been addressed, while also explaining that the opposer hasn't been active in the last few days. It might help if an uninvolved editor, preferably from WP:Skyscrapers, added a comment confirming that the list conforms to style guidelines (Raime (talk · contribs) seems like the best bet). That'll probably be sufficient for the oppose to be disregarded as acted upon. PeterSymonds | talk 22:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I've just seen that Raime's already supported the article. If the founder of WP:Skyscrapers is happy with it, then that should be enough hopefully. Perhaps ask him/her to confirm anyway, to be on the safe side. :) PeterSymonds | talk 22:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Note that just to be politically correct when you ask people to comment on featured article/list nominations, ask them to "comment," not to "support." The former is fine and neutral, the latter is canvassing. Thanks, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I closed a few FLCs a couple hours ago, but there was a new comment on that one, so I decided to leave it open so you would see it. I'll close it tomorrow. As well, you should be aware that there is a discussion that mentions you here. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I wasn't aware. Seems to be okay now. The main issue is the wording I use when I ask others to take a look at my nominations; I shouldn't use 'support or oppose' but rather ask for 'comments'. I'll be changing that from now on. Gary King (talk) 00:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Concerns

You may want to address the concerns here. There is a fairly defined line between canvassing and asking for a comment. Just address their concerns, and per above, try to be politically correct in the future when asking for comments. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

PHP

From: I removed the example code because this is supposed to be as encyclopedic as possible.

If you're going to remove a significant portion of an article then MAKE BETTER USE OF YOUR EDIT SUMMARY. You will also notice that Python syntax and semantics exists which makes it not a loss of information and I note that you didn't make PHP syntax and semantics and so you've removed the information that really separates one language from another: its syntax.

The way you've rationalized removing code examples is on par with saying Spanish language can't have any Spanish words or phrases in it at all. If you have to cut any and all code examples to make PHP a featured article then it shouldn't be done because it doesn't better this encyclopedia. Cburnett (talk) 18:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I've had a look, and the lead is fine: not too technical, while providing a good summary. It's an excellent article, and technical articles are, as you say, the most difficult to write, because of the balance between enough technical info and too much technical info! You've done a great job though, and once the copyediting's done, GA shouldn't be a problem. PeterSymonds | talk 21:27, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of adding your latest request on the talk page to the PR, for the benefit of reviewers, in case they don't check the talk page. PeterSymonds | talk 21:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I've had a look at this article also. I agree with Peter, it's really good for a technical article. It's a very notable subject, well sourced, pleasingly readable given inevitable technicalities, wonderful non technical, historical information there as well.

Although the code sample issue didn't strike me, on principle, I'd tend to be in favour of sample code. Helps even a casual reader visualise what the article is about. Most readers visiting the article would probably be technical enough not to be put off by a bit of code. However, I can completely understand the need to keep an eye on these kind of articles and watch that coding and jargon don't restrict them only to specialists in their field.

I have a maths background, but even so, some maths articles move too fast with stuff I'm rusty about. Mind you, I'd argue computer code is way more user friendly than foreign languages or mathematical and scientific symbols.

I had a look at FaceBook too btw. Hope my belated comments work with the community towards progress, rather than throw dust in the air. Thanks for all the work I see you doing Gary! Alastair Haines (talk) 06:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Apology

Hi, I just wanted to apologise for not contacting you regarding the post at the FLC talk page. It never even crossed my mind to do that. As I've said, I have nothing against you, or the lists you've nominated, so I hope we can continue to work on Wikipedia without this affecting anything. And I will still continue to support your noms, assuming they meet the criteria that is, and I don't see why they wouldn't as your previous ones all have. So again, I apologise if you felt picked on or anything. -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 20:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

It's alright; I'm still making friends at Wikipedia, anyways. I hope I haven't offended you; I hope I am considered to be civil (WP:CIVIL) in all matters related to me so far. Gary King (talk) 20:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course. Peter just reminded me of your Peer Review request, as well. I did look at the article, and as I said to him, following his review, I couldn't find anything else to comment on. Maybe next time though.. I see you have a backlog of articles you want reviewed! -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 20:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review and FLC

Hi Gary. If you have the time could you look at Degrassi: The Next Generation and comment at it's peer review, please? It just got given GA status and I want to take it to FAC soon.

Also I have nominated List of Scripps National Spelling Bee champions (here) and Chief Mouser to the Cabinet Office (here) at FLC, and would appreciate any comments you might be able to give there too, please. Thank you. -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 22:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Call of Duty 4

• Merge the "overview", "single player", and "multiplayer" sections into a single "gameplay" section. Talk about the game and its general aspects (first-person shooter, objective, etc.) and then have level three sections for the single player and the multiplayer aspects. Condense the multiplayer section drastically. No need to list modes (comment on a few as examples); basically, your job is to show how the multiplayer works and how it fits into the normal gameplay. Basically, summarize the individual sections, keep it coherent, and cut the extra section headings.
• Move the characters and story section into a "plot" section that covers both characters and the story. Try to keep the story as concise as possible - level four section headings to divide sections of the story are largely unnecessary. Just start a new paragraph. For the characters, describe them succinctly using prose. As for the in-universe referencing, you don't have to - I actually found it easier to cite using that style of referencing. You're free to use third party references or really, anything reliable and verifiable for them.
• Turn the "marketing" section into a "development" section covering the game and expand more on the development of the game. Include the "game engine" section as a third level heading of the development section. Also, cut out all the headings when you merge the "marketing" section. Move the "music and soundtrack" section above the "reception" section and change it to "audio".
• For the "reception" section, you want to cover how reception treats the different aspects of the game (gameplay - make sure you have comments on both single player, multiplayer, and the gameplay in general -, plot, graphics, game engine, audio, etc.). Listing the scores in the prose is largely redundant due to the table. I'm iffy about listing out all those awards as prose - a table/box/something else may be more appropriate, or incorporate it into the main body of the reception.

Do the above, get a good copy-editor, and you should be good. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

since there is already a CoD topic i just wanted to say that ill gladly help you on the article БοņёŠɓɤĭĠ₳₯є 06:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

likewise, I'll see what I can do. xenocidic (talk) 13:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Likewise, though I've been working on that article long enough to question whether it's considered "stable" enough for FA class. Lets get it to GA class first. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I already did so in the most recent archive, by outlining the consensus' of the page's editors. Specifically there is continuous insertion of speculation as to the fates of the characters who were involved in the nuclear attack, and involved in the attack on the bridge, and speculation as to the location and identities of the epilogue level. There are vandalisms involving fan site linkspam, adjusting reviews, etc. I'm keeping an eye out for it. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, good work. Add a single player section into the "gameplay" section. In the "reception" section cut out all mention of scores since you already have it in the review column. Work towards providing the praise/criticism/etc. of the gameplay, graphics, etc. (quotes are encouraged) - see Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow#Reception or Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow#Reception for how I did that. The story section could be reduced a bit also. As for your comment on different FAs, that's generally true. With these kind of articles you're gathering content and slapping in on a page and cleaning up, not constantly updating. As for where to find the in-game script, GameFAQs tends to have people post things like that. Otherwise, find some blog or fansite that does it or worst comes to worst, transcribe it from the game itself. Remember you can always condense the plot heavily and use third party sources for sourcing if necessary. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 18:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

My bad for the slow response. Your message got caught in a wave of others. In any case, upon perusal of the article, you really don't need a single player section. Just give a sentence mentioning that the mode exists and what it is (follows storyline of so and so characters, etc.). Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism of my userpage

Thanks for reverting! --Orange Mike | Talk 12:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Call of Duty 4

Thanks for the offer. I pretty much stopped edits on that article after a group of editors made significant changes to the layout a month or two ago, and I was one of the few who supported the previous version. If there's anything significant you need help on let me know, but otherwise I'm spending most of my time on other articles and schoolwork (trying for a scholarship this year).

P.S.- After a cursory glance at the revamped article, I just want to know if the plot section is still a work in progress. We may have to scale it back a bit, and I wouldn't oppose removing the character sections altogether (they have been the source of much of the disagreements over minor details in the past, and quite frankly I fail to see why they need to be included in the article at all if there is a separate character list on Call of Duty (series)). Comandante42 (talk · contribs)

Alright. I'll introduce the character section issue a little later.  Comandante Talk 19:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Call of Duty 4 - War Pig.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Call of Duty 4 - War Pig.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 20:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Endoxon

A tag has been placed on Endoxon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 04:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of ImageAmerica

A tag has been placed on ImageAmerica requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 04:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

ImageAmerica

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article ImageAmerica, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 13:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd recommend you contest the prod. Looks fairly notable with your recent cleanup. Naturally, adding more sources for notability assertion per WP:ORG is always good. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Abuse on Hindi Wikipedia

FROM : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement

www.hi.wikipedia.org

All Administrators of Hindi Wikipedia are involved and particularly (1) Rajiv Mass (2) Purnima Varman and (3) Manish Vashistha confirmed. Other three are in line of confirmation.

Rajiv Mass has opend dummy account in name of Ravi Jain on Hindi, Gujarati, Marathi, English and many languages with IP 124.124.36.4 of Rajiv Mass and harassing other members on many languages.

hi.wikipedia

gu.wikipedia

mr.wikipedia

en.wikipedia

Everything with fact is given on Hindi Wikipedia and all Admn. know.

In case all Admn. on Hindi wikipedia are involved, please, bring this fact to entire world.

I am from India and feel very ashmed that my brothers are involved in Vandals activities on wikipedia.

For this notice board fact can be seen by nacked eye on :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Vkvora2001

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jainjain

copy of this is pasted on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics

I signed as vkvora. vkvora2001 (talk) 16:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Economics for Dummies

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Economics for Dummies, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Economics for Dummies. —Bkell (talk) 18:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Admin questions

As you're getting along pretty well with your contributions, it would be nice to turn to some of the actual RfA material. The first three questions are mandatory for all potential administrators, and they set the tone for the rest of your RfA. At your leisure, could you give your answers to the first three questions on my talk page? Feel free to take as much time as you please and peruse former RfAs for ways on how to set them up. We'll discuss them after you give the answers and whether there's anything that can be changed or improved upon. I'm confident they'll be pretty solid though. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:R. Kelly.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:R. Kelly.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 02:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your incredible volume of work towards improving articles, especially the featured lists and good articles you have worked on, as well as your work elsewhere. Keep it up. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Great work. Also note that if you're creating new articles, you might be interested in WP:DYK. If you manage to crank out a few DYKs, then you might start looking at User:Durova's triple crown awards, which are nice accolades to shoot for. Best regards, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Facebook user growth.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Facebook user growth.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 07:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

COD4

Why did you remove the downloads section? This is the best part of this article now that the game is widespread across the world. We like to know when the last updates were and any news on downloadable maps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.165.196.84 (talk) 13:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:FT

I think it's difficult to define a FT in such a manner. If you were to define the topical scope as "lists of billionaires," then the point is going to be raised as to where are the previous lists. Since Forbes has decades of lists, the topic won't be comprehensive. However, if you had 40-50 FLs, the topic would be too big. You need to narrow the topical scope to something manageable. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 22:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

That leads to a cherry picking problem of only selecting a few articles in order to get a topic. You also have a problem in that List of billionaires isn't a good main article to define such a topic. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 22:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The cherry picking problem still exists. Take it this way, can lists be created going back a couple decades? If so, the topic is cherry picking. Still, I could be wrong about this, but inquire with User:Arctic.gnome, who is the unofficial "featured topic director" of sorts. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 22:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay will do. Gary King (talk) 22:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Betty Rizzo

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Betty Rizzo, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 23:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:PHP Hello World screenshot.png

I disagree that Image:PHP Hello World screenshot.png is a copyrighted image. It is well established that rendered fonts are not copyrightable (it's the generator that is) and basic coloring can't be copyrighted either. So a screenshot of just text can't be copyrighted.

That said, I don't understand why raw <source>...</source> isn't sufficient. Cburnett (talk) 04:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Call of Duty 4 - War Pig.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Call of Duty 4 - War Pig.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) 12:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Call of Duty 4 - Al-Asad.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Call of Duty 4 - Al-Asad.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) 12:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Economics for Dummies.jpeg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Economics for Dummies.jpeg. 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) 12:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:061116.friedman.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:061116.friedman.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 22:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Template

Seems like a good idea. You might want to bring it to Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) to get a wider audience on the matter though. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Note that if all you're doing is search and replace, you might be interested in getting WP:AWB. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 20:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It can do "What links here." It also has a nifty search and replace function. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 20:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Creating a WP:FT with Lists of billionaires

For a topic called "Lists of billionaires", I think that to pass the requirement of covering the topic completely, you would have to have lists for every year that there have been billionaires. To limit it to recent years, you would have to have a lead article that explained why those years' lists formed a complete topic of study by themselves. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 12:06, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Place holder

That would defeat the point. Place holder is used to replace people who don't want to be named in the list, without changing the numbering for people who do. Rich Farmbrough, 16:21 26 March 2008 (GMT).

List of acquisitions made by Google

Great job on your clean-up of that article. --Danny Rathjens (talk) 19:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 22:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

dts22

Hi Gary, just a quick word to ask if you'd noticed that the documentation on {{dts22}} still refers to {{dts2}}. It's very confusing. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. Gary King (talk) 22:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

dts2

Hi there - couldn't help noticing you've been changing dts to dts2 on various pages on my watchlist, including some in my userspace. Was there any discussion about this change that I missed before the template was "deprecated"? Did you realise that you've been changing people's comments on talk pages (e.g. where there was an old discussion about dts, which you changed to be a discussion about dts2)? Changing other people's comments in old discussions is generally not a good idea. What was the point of the change from dts to dts2 anyway, and why did it need a new template? Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 23:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Good point - the Talk pages were changed at the same time as the articles. They've been reverted. As for why, it was done in order to follow the ISO 8601 standard that is used across other Wikipedia templates. Gary King (talk) 23:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

And the prior discussion about this was where...? And it needed a whole new template because...? Bencherlite^Talk 08:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

(cough)? Bencherlite^Talk 08:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

{{dts2}} was created so that the articles using the old template could continue to use it. Gary King (talk) 18:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Question about dts2

I noticed that the template was changed from dts to dts2 on one of my sand box pages. Can you please explain what all of this means? I have no idea. Please reply at My Talk Page. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC))

{{dts}} was changed to {{dts2}} because the date format for {{dts}} was changed in order to comply with ISO 8601, the date format used on Wikipedia. If you want, I can revert the change that I made - I made it because if it was not changed then it would be broken after the template changed. Gary King (talk) 23:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not understand a word of that. I am not a computer techie or a programmer. I have no idea what you just said (above). Can you please explain what this is all about in terms understandable to me ... or direct me to someone who can do so? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC))

The way that you use the template has changed. Gary King (talk) 23:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You're very skilled at explaining things. Thanks. Now, it's all cleared up for me. Thank you. Please take note of sarcasm. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC))

List of countries by formation dates

Mindful of the couple of country lists you recently got to FA, I don't suppose you'd care to enter into the task of sorting out List of countries by formation dates, bearing in mind the current discussions comments at Talk:List of countries by formation dates#This page needs to be radically reformed, and our ability to answer questions such as Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#oldest. Thought (hoped) you might be interested; will understand if it does not appeal. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm counting on it being ugly enough to irritate you into doing something ;) But only if it grabs you; thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I was involved in the Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#oldest discussion, which brought the list page to my attention. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Help

Do you see this link in your browser? Whenever I tried this link, my browser displays no connection found. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 01:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Then there is some problem in the link. The link is about a research paper on a bridge. I found you by recent change patrolling. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 01:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I will ask one more editor to be sure if the problem is with our browsers or in the link. The reference is very much important to me. However I think the is PDF link has some problems, but I can view it as HTML. Thanks for your help. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 01:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Deprecated Dts template

Hi, please could you point me towards where it says the {{dts}} template is deprecated? There doesn't seem to be anything on the documentation or on the talk page. thank you, Struway2 (talk) 01:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply. Do you not think it's confusing if the bit that says it's deprecated only appears on the documentation for a matter of hours before disappearing again? Struway2 (talk) 02:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Nintendo 64

I certainly am willing to help get Nintendo 64 up to FA status. I mostly do WikiGnoming, but I hope it helps. Useight (talk) 06:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

P.S. - If you want to help out, I'm also trying to get Pikachu to FA. Useight (talk) 06:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:FT

Wow, you're really ambitious aren't you? I think it's a bit hard to justify Nintendo as the main article; creating a List of Nintendo video game consoles article might be plausible. Work the rest up to GA/FA status first though before inquiring. As for the supplementary items, I think just the ones at Nintendo#Consoles are sufficient; although I'm unsure whether you would have to bring just Game Boy line to GA/FA status or every single individual item (that's another FT by the way if you're interested) in that line. I think the former is fine. Just to note, you will highly impress and make a lot of people happy at WP:VG if you can pull this off. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Take that back. You probably would have to do every individual item since I can't see you justifying just Nintendo DS and not Nintendo DS Lite. You can exclude Game Boy line if you have all the individual items though. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh. Eh...I suppose you could create such a topic, and have a legitimate scope, but having a new article solely on the non-portable consoles would be difficult, simply because there's not enough of them. I don't think you have any recourse other than to get the portable consoles, since you can't justify a List of Nintendo video game consoles article that doesn't include the portable consoles. Nintendo also becomes completely unsuitable as an article for this scope since the other half of Nintendo#Consoles is the portable consoles. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I need more sleep (wrote List of Naruto video game consoles instead of List of Nintendo video game consoles, see my sandbox for why). Anyway, yes, there is a distinction, and that is a topic of legitimate scope, but your difficulty is having a main article on it. Having a list with seven or so items isn't really justifiable, especially since that list has to pass WP:FLC. I think expanding the scope for portable consoles is really the only way to go unfortunately. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Nintendo Gamecube

Well, I'm not as big of a fan of the Gamecube as the Nintendo 64, so I will be helping out more getting the 64's article up to FA status. Again, if you want to help improve Pikachu to FA status, that'd be great, too. Useight (talk) 16:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. Gary King (talk) 19:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

COD4 (2)

Congrats on making it a GA. Next stop, FA! ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 19:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 19:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:FT of Nintendo video game consoles?

I think those topics could pass a FTC together. Your biggest challenge will be writing a good introduction for your new lead article. It would have to give an overview of Nintendo consoles as a whole before going into the system-by-system list. Example things to talk about in the intro to your list include: What do all of these systems have in common (target audience and in-game characters maybe)? How do they all differ from other lines of system? What general trends have there been in the progression of systems in addition to improved graphics? How long does Nintendo usualy wait before making a new system? Have there been any abandoned ideas for systems? --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Good ideas, I'll keep them in mind. Gary King (talk) 20:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Table of contents on WP:FT?

Right now there is a TOC that breaks it down into four fields of study, but it is a bit tedious to scroll through the big Ft boxes. I'll try to test a few ways of listing all of the FT titles in the header of the list. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay thanks I look forward to that. Gary King (talk) 20:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars

Just wanted to say nice job on the Star Wars cleanup. I has needed if for a long time! Vertigo315 (talk) 01:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Feel free to help out - I need all the help I can get with such a popular topic. Gary King (talk) 01:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Just noting that if you kick Star Wars to GA/FA, you can revive the Star Wars films featured topic (see Wikipedia:Former featured topics) that was delisted due to not having a proper main article (Star Wars would act as the main). Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Star Wars

Holy crap, that's some improvement. Great work. FYI, you'll make quite a few people happy if you manage to pull this off. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 03:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Irreplaceable

Thanks heaps for the support. --Efe (talk) 08:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars to Featured Article Status

Gary King--Thank you very much for the offer, I am more into Star Wars: Battlefront and therefore know more about it then actual Star Wars. I will try to do my best to help make it a featured article though, you will notice however that my status on Wikipedia is "iffy" and I am not on that much. So I guess I am in, thanks Cheers! Stealth (talk) 10:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I see that you are a longer time user than I am so it feels weird to remind you of this, but the Star Wars GA will be quickfailed unless you remove the cleanup templates from the article and fill in the citation needed tags in the article. Good luck though, this is key to getting the Star Wars featured topic back. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

:) Oh ok cool. Good luck! You should take it to FA when your done, it looks really good. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Gary King-- Would you like it if I made a sub page of the SW talk page to talk about this? Stealth (talk) 21:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, I think we should do this as an archive so it is easier to keep track of things. I have started a sub page Talk:Star Wars/FA FA relating to Featured Article. Hope thats ok Stealth (talk) 01:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Response

Yeah, I did some promotions earlier today, so I'll get around to it tomorrow and then I can promote more than one. In the mean time, there is a large backlog right now, so if you could review some FLCs, it would be much appreciated. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

My response

Sorry, I didn't come to your talk page here before, so I missed the message at the top. Anyway, I responded here. Rocket000 (talk) 01:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Featured topics

Heh, well, enjoy yourself. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

User Page

Hi, I was wondering if you could tell me how your doing this stuff to your user page? I finally got a userbox from yours but I have never been able to do well with other stuff..... WOuld you mind if I took some things from your user page for myself? (mainly the Star Wars project) Thanks. Stealth (talk) 09:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. Gary King (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Adminship

In the end, we're all editors, and very few administrators on the project involve themselves solely in project-specific tasks. A popular response to this case is that an administrator, even if he or she has only used her tools once (and correctly), has benefited the project. For me, I hardly ever use my administrative tools outside of WP:AIV and CAT:CSD, and I can still say that I am better off with the tools than without them. This attitude is reflected at WP:RFA to a degree, as article building is ultimately what this encyclopedia is about, and is a quality that many reviewers strive to see in prospective administrators, as it ensures long-term dedication to the project. Better to have an administrator that is going to stick around for a year or longer building articles and occasionally helping out in administrator-specific tasks than one who focuses solely on clearing backlogs and nothing else (that said, any such efforts to help clear backlogs are obviously greatly appreciated). A good illustration is these two RfAs: mine and this user's. I came to RfA with two featured topics, over twenty featured lists, a featured article, a handful of good articles, and some decent experience in speedy deletion, AIV, AfD, and the help desk. The latter use came with an impressive portfolio of anti-vandalism work and other administrator tasks, but little to no article writing. There's half-a-dozen opposes on his RfA over his lack of article contributions, and more than half of the supports on my RfA are from users who appreciated my article contributions. In any case, don't fret about adminship, it's "not a big deal" (the cliché commonly applied to it) and it's not a full-time position. Heck, I had a user on my RfA actually comment that he hoped my article contributions would stay consistent after I got the tools. You're in a pretty good situation for acquiring adminship as is. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 19:07, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, forgot to answer the last part of your post. I would say about a month and a half to two months more of contributions and you should be ready for RfA. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I had no consensus the first time I RFA'd, but made it on my 2nd try with nearly unanimous support. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 00:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The thing I'm trying to avoid here is having to do multiple RfAs by nailing it with the first one, as typically, 2-3 months are required between RfAs to demonstrate adequate improvement, and opposes tend to pile up if there isn't a significant gap between RfAs. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd rather not fail on the first RFA. One thing I notice, though, is that if there's one opposition to an RFA that is substantial, then people who would either have voted Support or not voted at all would instead join in to Oppose and say 'per above', pointing to the first major opposition example. Those are usually the crushing blows to failed RFAs. Gary King (talk) 00:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined - reason

Please see User_talk:Bibliomaniac15#Recent_speedy_deletion to see why Image:Incline.gif was not deleted (or was actually deleted in error and immediately undeleted). --Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 19:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Alright, gotcha. Gary King (talk) 20:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

My bad

Sorry about that rollback on Bill Gates; only read the diff as far as some (accidental?) gibberish-looking stuff at the start. If you were bothered by it you'd probably leave me a note, but all the same, my apologies. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Stephanie Eisenberg

An editor has nominated Stephanie Eisenberg, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephanie Eisenberg and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Zelda GAN

I'm sorry for being so slow with the review, my internet connection has been failing on me all week long because of snow, wind, etc. Zelda is almost there, see talk page.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 08:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Multiple FAC noms

I've removed your second FAC nomination per the WP:FAC instructions: Users should not add a second FA nomination until the first has gained support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. I also noticed that The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past has not had a recent peer review, and suggest that you consider the tips at the bottom of WP:FCDW/March 17, 2008, seeking out and inviting qualified reviewers to the PR to help you prepare the article for FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Semi on Bill Gates

I have re-protected it. :-) - Philippe 21:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry for the hassle. Gary King (talk) 21:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Archive.org is THE reliable source for what USED to be on web pages long ago

You claim that archive.org is not a reliable source? OK, then, name something better for that purpose... oh, wait, there isn't any such better source for publicly available historical internet archives, is there? WTF! Zaphraud (talk) 02:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Re (how to deal with when a website 'moves' in the context of archive.org)

It shows EXACTLY was at THAT website at THAT point in time. You are mistaking the location on the web for the company that owns that location. I explained this clearly by comparing it to a ground-breaking. When a company relocates, one does not assert that the ground-breaking for the building they moved into took place when the company was founded! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaphraud (talk • contribs) 02:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Zaphraud, relax. It's not the end of the world if this specific sentence is wrong, and there's no reason you can't discuss this in a calm and civil manner. To you Gary, good job on conducting your responses in the aforementioned calm and civil manner, which is certainly what every administrator-hopeful needs. Small things go a long way. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of the Ivy League, I just got accepted to Princeton, Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, and Columbia. =) Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 03:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

If the intent is to convey date of the birth of the company, perhaps one might say that the company was founded on (founding date), and that it launched its first website on (date that is the subject of this arguement). I'm just about done caring now, but, it seems like there are so many ways to get this one right that once the dust has settled and everyone is good and satisfied that my edits are reverted for good and all, maybe you can peacefully work out amongst yourselves some replacement text that is so factually solid this incident need never repeat itself. Zaphraud (talk) 03:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Full protection on Grandfather paradox?

I know that it's being vandalized because it's linked to from Google, but so far, the vandals have been IPs or new members. I don't see why semi-protection isn't sufficient? No need to go into full blast full protection unless there's a dispute going on or for some reason, established users are vandalizing the article. Gary King (talk) 15:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Established users seldom vandalise articles, but we still sometimes fully protect articles due to vandalism (and have a template for this purpose).

In this instance, the semi-protection wasn't working, and and a page encouraging users to continue the vandalism just made the front page of Digg.

Please note that while I switched from semi-protection to full protection, I also substantially shortened the duration (in the hope that the vandalism will cease at day's end). —David Levy 16:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I just noticed that the article was previously semiprotected first. Still, full seems a bit excessive since I thought that was usually reserved for articles where established users debated on an article so neither side was 'right' and had to resolve the issue before editing again. I would imagine the attention the article is getting is also beneficial in that people might want to improve it since it's really popular now, but again, I'm just an idealist :) Gary King (talk) 15:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Full protection is not limited to content disputes. I agree that it would be nice to utilize the publicity as a means of attracting new editors, but even semi-protection prevents that (and this probably is the one day of the year on which such an effort isn't feasible). —David Levy 16:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Halloween

If you can give me about a day to clean up the film overview section (it'll look more like Friday the 13th (franchise)#Overview) then I'll go ahead and move everything over. I have a paper that I have to write so I probably won't focus on "real" editing of that page until I get that done today (I just wanted to get the cleanup and organization going). Please, feel free to edit inside my sandbox; if you're worried about losing edits then just hop over to the sandbox and work in there until everything is ready to come over.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, sounds good. Gary King (talk) 17:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's fine. I'm sorry, I just got side-tracked.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I just copied it over. :)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, we'll start from there then. Gary King (talk) 22:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't know where any would be appropriate at the moment, because there isn't really a lot of information there. Much of it is unsourced, and what is there to begin with doesn't discuss anything that really needs illustration. I think Carpenter's musical score is rather iconic and I'm sure we could find something about that to beef up the music section which would allow us to put in a media sample of the Halloween theme song. The only reason Friday the 13th has an image in the body is because of the detail that went into the advertisement in Variety. What I usually do when I have a page that cannot really support images is I find good quotes that represent the section or paragraph they are beside and I place them in a colored box. This adds a bit of asthetic-ness to the page, without having to worry about violating fair-use laws.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I have to disagree with the change in headers. It's inaccurate to name these things "Legacy" when that's such a strong insinuation that it was the film series as a whole that brought about the books and comics and merchandise. If anything, the first film brought it all. It's better to stick with the a similar structure like the other franchise horror film pages.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

That's actually what I was just beginning to work on. I was about to start shrinking all those plots in the sandbox and converge them into one section (like the Friday page). One thing that definitely needs to be done is we need to tag all the unsourced comments with a {{fact|date=April 2008}} tag. This way we know what isn't sourced and we can either try and find a source for it, or remove it later if we determine we cannot find any reliable sources to support it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not 100% comprehensive yet. There is more that I want to add in the "Impact" section...more on how people have analyzed the franchise. There only a little more that can be done to that page before it bursts, but I'm certainly proud of it. It's come along way from where it originally was when I found it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I obviously have all the Friday books, since I used them to write the article. ;) lol. I have all the DVDs for the Halloween films. Some have commentaries, some don't. The Halloween series has been seriously neglected when it comes to this type of information. I do have the 20 Years of Terror DVD, which is basically a huge DVD of interviews and behind-the-scenes footage. I was hoping they would have information so that I could finish the Michael Myers page - which I modeled after my work on the Jason Voorhees article. I think there will probably be some good information about the movies. The problem is that a lot of the times you get information that isn't particularly beneficial to an encyclopedia (like cast and crew rambling on about some random experience that has nothing to do with making the film directly...funny to hear, but not useful to the project).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the three Spider-Man pages, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and a couple others have been some projects that I have collaborated on with User:Erik and User:Alientraveller. We're always looking for some fresh blood to come in and help spruce up those articles. Especially Batman Begins, because we all want to get that to FA status before the new movie comes out.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've done the first 5 Halloween films (you can check it out in my sandbox). I'll finish the rest tomorrow. It's after midnight and I have to go to work at 8 am...so, needless to say I need to get some sleep. It's coming along quite easily. I'll probably copy that information and paste it into an email and email it to myself at work, that way I can finish it before my lunch break and go ahead and copy it over to the mainspace by tomorrow afternoon.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, I know there are subsections in the "Production" section that need expanding. We never exhausted the DVD commentaries or the behind the scenes documentaries. I know Erik wanted to expand the "Themes" section. Other than that, I would post a note on the talk page and ask anyone/everyone what they think needs to be done to get this page to FA. Upon looking at the talk page, I see that we already had section ("FA drive") where we were doing that. So, I would create a new subsection in that discussion with a note asking everyone where we think we are with the article. Fresh faces to the talk page usually brings people back and gets them in the mood to edit.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the plot section is too long. It's summarizing 9 films. If they were individual articles that would be approximately 6300 words. As the franchise page stands, it's 1400 words (about 155 words per film..which is rather small).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

That's where the extra words come in. Halloween has been retconned twice, and rebooted from the start. First, you have the continuity of Halloween 1 -6. Then, H20 retcons the events, making the new continuity Halloween 1, 2, H20. Then Resurrection was a sequel to H20. Finally, Zombie's remake in 2007 started it all over again. Plus, the Star Wars page doesn't name all the actors in their respective roles, nor the names of the films themselves. The overview here is written with a touch more out-of-universe tone, where it identifies what each film did - instead of what the overall films did. It's just a different set up. The amount of detail isn't that much.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

If you remove the last 3 films from the section, and all the names of the actors and the names of the films and reword each opening to reflect a similar structure as Star War, they're about the same.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Way to go Activision was NOT a forum comment

How is that a forum comment? I was stating that the article was incorrect in stating that downloadable content would be available for Wii in Q1 2008. Q1 ended today. I have not changed the article yet, but probably will. Anyway, aren't you supposed to flag it before deleting it (I'm not sure, I'm not that experienced in all of Wiki's guidelines? In closing, I am going to repost a similar content that doesn't seem as forumish. frogTape: Covered in flies for your enjoyment (talk) 21:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, feel free to repost it. It felt a bit too forumish and it still looks like trollbait; if you rephrase it, then post it. Gary King (talk) 21:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I already did. I guess I didn't pick a very good section title. frogTape: Covered in flies for your enjoyment (talk) 21:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Zelda

I'll see what I can do, but I'm not able to contribute much right now because of pressing schoolwork. DurinsBane87 (talk) 21:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

If you get Zelda II to GA status, I'll give you a barnstar :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)]

I like to reward good users, and this article seems somewhat hopeless, as the black sheep Zelda game and all. It will also get us one game closer (3 more to go) to a Featured Topic of Zelda games. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Zelda II

I am working on improving Zelda II: The Adventure of Link to Featured Article status and noticed that you have made substantial contributions to the article. If you have time, I would be delighted if you could help with this endeavor. Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cocoapropo"

I would be happy to help out, and I will try to remember to check back regularly to lend assistance to the project. I appreciate it!Cocoapropo (talk) 02:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I am glad to help out, but how do I edit the article such that it adheres to the standard of a featured article? Kiwi8 (talk) 06:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I still dunno how to edit the article to satisfy the standards of a featured article despite you giving me the guidelines. How about you highlight the things that need to be done and perhaps some of us can split the work amongst ourselves?Kiwi8 (talk) 21:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Clarification

I don't want a list added, I want a character section with about a paragraph of information on the characters, like many other articles have. See Final_Fantasy_IV#Characters. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I fully agree with that too. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Mebuy.pl

Hi i really don't understand what the problem is with this articel.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tintin72 (talk • contribs) 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Rental Magica episodes

Is past the ten day mark and in need of more commentary. Also, for the issue with the billionaire lists and User:Colin, don't worry about it. He's probably one of the most experienced editors at WP:FLC; just follow his suggestions for the merging, etc. and you'll be fine. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:PHP Hello World screenshot.png

A tag has been placed on Image:PHP Hello World screenshot.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:PHP Hello World screenshot.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Gary King (talk) 01:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:Expanding articles

Sort of. I would only write articles for games if I had already played that game extensively, and thus, I would know about the content that would need to go into gameplay and plot, and would instead look for sources that verified what I placed. For development and reception, it is intrinsically limited to the sources you can find, and I simply go through the sources I can find and tack them on, organizing the information coherently as I go. I tend to list out all my available sources before writing either of these sections though and devise the best way to present the information I have. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Practically all featured articles nowadays are primarily written by one person, perhaps two. Another person might concentrate on sourcing or copy-editing, but the bulk of the content is largely going to come from one person. The main reason is the simple consistency derived from having one person's style constant throughout an article and then copy-editing through that several times over. Yes, there are different methods, but the greater amount of people you get, the more difficult it becomes to coordinate. Just the way it is. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Food and drink articles are infamous for having the fewest number of featured articles out of all present categories that do have them. See WP:FOOD. You're talking to someone with zero experience in the matter. :p Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

The preview version is fine; that said, I would think you could find the same information from the preview in a full article from another source. Still, it's fine. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I do it manually. I have looked into getting a bot to do it, but it would take the bot runner quite a bit of work to get it up and running, so I decided to just do it by myself. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It could, but he told me he would have to build lists of promotions from the past years, and it would all have to be checked manually, thus causing a lot of work for him. I basically decided it's easier just to do it myself. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

PHP in dutch

Hi Gary, I like all the work you've done on the PHP page and thought I'd check out the links in prep for featured status. The second link was to a manual page in dutch! So I assumed vandalism and tried to find the person responsible. Guess who did it... You!... Either you're cleverer than the average vandal or this [change] done by you using Link_checker seems to have a problem. I've put the link to the english version. I guess the Link Checker tool can't always get it right lol. Keep up the good work. --Brian R Hunter (talk) 00:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

what a clever tool it is, PHP is one of the few sites with so many international mirrors, it makes sense that it would choose its home site. If I get time I will propose the tool be given a language option. What fun this wikipedia life is :) --Brian R Hunter (talk) 02:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I think you're right. Time for bed :) --Brian R Hunter (talk) 02:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Michigan State Spartans Championships

I moved the championships to List of Michigan State Spartans championships. Peanuts5402 (talk) 04:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that's much better. Gary King (talk) 04:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Waterwindsail

Can you please review this sandbox article and let me know your thoughts on notability at this time ?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Waterwindsail/Sandbox thank you --Waterwindsail (talk) 06:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The article needs inline citations. Gary King (talk) 06:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

re WP:WBFLN

Hi - The bot I run could update WP:WBFLN, but it takes as input pre-parsed versions of the nomination log files, see for example Wikipedia:Featured articles nominated in 2008. I maintain these in a semi-automated fashion (the bot helps), but fundamentally what happens is the bot makes a guess about who the nominator is for each promoted FA, I manually verify it, and then the bot updates the by-year (pre-parsed) list. If someone were willing to create and maintain similar by-year lists for featured lists, I'd be happy to have my bot update WP:WBFLN but I don't think I can take on (at least not at the moment) creating and maintaining these lists. Perhaps an alternative might be for me to run the entire process fully automated, i.e. the bot would update the by-year lists based on its guess without review. Then, if someone simply updated the by-year list if the bot got it wrong, the WBFLN list would be updated the next time the bot ran (daily). -- Rick Block (talk) 17:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:Autobiographical sources

For a non-controversial claim, it's fine. Relevant reading is WP:SELFPUB. If at all possible, use secondary or tertiary sources, but an autobiographical source is fine if that is what you have available. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 22:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I would prefer online sources if they're secondary sources over his autobiography if that is what you mean. Especially since he's a living person, WP:BLP dictates that you want to use the best sources possible to verify everything. That said, feel free to use it from then to then; however, if the claim is controversial, either don't use his autobiography or note that "according to Gates' autobiography..." Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. As for the image, we generally don't protect things that get on the main page. Every recent changes patroller worth their salt watches the main page article, and any vandalism is reverted quickly. Same thing with the image. It's a bit hypocritical if we have the main page article protected when we claim "anyone can edit." Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

*Shrug* Different practices I suppose. I'm not that familiar with the relevant guidelines concerning images on the main page. Any vandalism to the picture itself would be reverted pretty fast though. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Facebook Chat

I appreciate your warm welcome to wikipedia and I also appreciate that wikipedia is based on the need for citing sources. However, in this case, the new chat feature has not been discussed on the facebook blog or in media of any kind. Wired magazine came out with an article saying that facebook would come out with the chat feature, but that was a few weeks ago. http://blog.wired.com/monkeybites/2008/03/facebook-adds-c.html

I believe that this is an example of a time the cited source is implied or not needed. In my opinion, this also serves as an example of what is great about wikipedia: catching on to something before the media picks up on it.

But let me know what you think. Geo19_4 (talk)

Bill Gates

While your work on this article is appreciated, those of us who monitor articles for vandalism or other changes that are against policy would find it very helpful if you could combine your edits into fewer larger ones, and if you could provide a descriptive summary of what you've done. Dozens of edits described as "cleanup" helps nobody. This is a community effort -- help the community understand what you're doing with good edit summaries. -/- Warren 02:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

History of Microsoft; GA review

Instead of making any decision i would like to request you to expand the lead of the article. it is insufficient for this article. the rest of the article seems to me perfect and factual. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 03:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

fine i will. wait for just a few minutes (40 minutes time please). thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 03:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

WELL I HAVE PASSED THE ARTICLE. congrats! you would be delighted to know that i reviewed this article on iMac. it was fun. hahaha, just kidding! fine i will be reviewing the next article too. but i need some time if you don't mind. Sushant gupta (talk) 09:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

yeah this morning i will be dealing with it. i will make my decision within 35 minutes (i need to review it completely first). thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 03:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

:::: well no problem with the factual aspect but there is inconsistency in the units used in real estate subsection. you can use square feet → m² instead of acres → km². also instead of having subsections in the investment section you have bold emphasis by inserting ;
for example instead of ===Real estate=== you can have ;Real estate. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 04:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC) (i have addressed these issues myself)

pls. add ref to the statement→ Allen also owns three professional sports teams: the Seattle Seahawks of the National Football League, the Portland Trail Blazers of the National Basketball Association, and the future Seattle soccer franchise in Major League Soccer that will begin playing in the 2009 season. (in the introduction). thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 04:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

sorry to revert your edits but kindly have a look at Geology of solar terrestrial planets, Evolutionary history of life. these are GAs. also it is used in many FAs. until we have articles on those sections it really gives a bad impression. anyway i think the article is now ready for being a GA. Sushant gupta (talk) 08:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

replied on talk page! Sushant gupta (talk) 09:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars Featured Topic Revival

Please do the honors of nominating it for renewed Featured Status, as the lead article is now GA :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Facebook to FA

Hi Gary. Thanks for your messages and my apologies for not replying soon. Unfortunately, I am presently very busy with university work (it is getting close to the end of my 3rd year so lots to do!) so won't be able to help with anything "full on" like FA nominations. However, good work on the article and I hope it gets it. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 08:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Zelda II

I passed it because it has massively improved, and has attained GA. It will be a hard fight to get it to FA, but the beauty of trying is that it will greatly improve that way too, and may even pass. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

		"The Video Game Barnstar"
		This is for making Zelda II: The Adventure of Link a Good Article, and making us dream of FA, which I didn't think was possible. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Added to User:Gary_King#Barnstars, although I'm trying to collect different types of barnstars :p Gary King (talk) 23:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I switched it for you so you'll like it :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Nice—thanks! Gary King (talk) 23:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Zelda

I first need to thank you for turning Star Wars into a GA, making the Star Wars FT viable again. Also, for turning the Zelda articles which still needed development GAs. But just a reminder: for Featured Topics There is no obvious gap (missing or stub article) in the topic. A topic must not cherry pick only the best articles to become featured together.. So, you still need Four Swords and FSA in order to make a Zelda FT... and you should include Link along only if other characters articles/lists are developed enough. igordebraga ≠ 15:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess needs a bunch of references to get ride of the fact tag at the bottom, because as long as that's there it is at risk of delisting. Judgesurreal777 (talk)

I reformatted the Four Swords article to have more standard formatting, it should be clearer now what is needed. Go ahead and do anything I have recommended on previous articles and I'll have a look and see if I have more thoughts. Sound good? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

VERY IMPORTANT; I found a Six-part retrospective on Legend of Zelda series, http://www.gametrailers.com/player/14063&type=mov&pl=game.html?id=14063&type=mov&pl=game

Gametrailers is a reliable sources, so fill the articles with information from here! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

WBFLN

Hi - You archived this without replying. Does that mean you're not interested in an approach where I run my bot in a fully automated fashion (relying on after the fact corrections to its guesses about who the nominator is)? Just curious. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I've created Wikipedia:Featured lists nominated in 2005, exactly as the bot would have done it. I haven't checked this against the nomination logs. I can pretty easily create similar lists for 2006, 2007, and 2008. After these are scrubbed, it would be trivial to update WPFLN from them. Let me know what you think about this. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. In 2007 sometime, the nomination closers started using a "closing box" template that makes the tool guess the closer as the nominator. I'll have to fix this before completing the 2007 and 2008 by-year lists. Shouldn't take long, but won't be immediate. In the meantime, if you want to verify the 2005 and 2006 lists that'd be helpful. I dropped the main page column from the 2006 list (lists don't appear on the main page). I could easily zap this column from the 2005 list if this would be at all difficult for you to do. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I've populated the by year lists through April 2008. If you want to look through these and verify the contents that'd be good. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, hold off on this for a bit. I'm thinking about changing how the bot guesses who the nominator is. It currently does it based on the contents of the nomination file (first link to a user). I think it might be much more accurate if the guess is the user who created the nomination file. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I've now updated the by-year lists to use the creator of the nomination file as the nominator. I can have the bot add any new noms (on a daily basis). If you could verify (month by month) the noms are correctly attributed and let me know when you're done, I'll add a step so the bot regenerates WBFLN based on these lists. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:38, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

pp-semi-vandalism issue

I think I've fixed it, can you point me to the original problem? Nihiltres^{t.l} 19:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC) (cross-posted)

List of unrecognized countries

I am confused as to why the Holy See is not included on the list, as it is currently unrecognized by 18 countries. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on the vandalism

You can tell you're getting popular when they vandalise your userpages! Must be all those Good articles you've done on the highly vandalled articles.. Congrats on the GA, by the way. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 03:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

What did I do wrong?

what did i do wrong?Xp54321 (talk) 00:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I thought that since the review all had support opinions, it was a featured article.Xp54321 (talk) 00:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I have responded on your Talk page. Gary King (talk) 00:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

So how is it accepted?Does an administrator make it featured? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xp54321 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

So if there is consensus, User:Raul654 promotes the article?Xp54321 (talk) 00:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

What is the difference for the process of promoting a topic from an article?Xp54321 (talk) 01:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Am I annoying you?:)?Xp54321 (talk) 01:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

One more thing due to my "vandalism", will be blocked in the future after one more bad edit?:(? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xp54321 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Fine.I'm sure this will be the start of a wonderful friendship.......................................................................I'm kidding.Xp54321 (talk) 01:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

AoL Help

Hi Gary, Yes, I'll certainly help in making the article better. I haven't seen it in a few months now, so I'll take a look over the next few days and see what I can contribute. -As I recall, the plot section was definitely an issue with me; my potential solution was to use a very short, highly abridged plot, but to somehow allow for the user to expand it for more information -similar to the way the table of contents works. Perhaps you know more about whether this is feasible or not.

Thanks, -Justin. Zixor (talk) 03:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Featured Topics

It is awesome and commendable that you are set on getting all those featured topics back. I would strongly recommend you read over their removal nominations, as there are sometimes reasons other than articles were no longer FA or GA. In the case of the Michigan University one, it was thought that it was unrepresentative of the topic, and the Halloween movie topic failed because it only included the first 3 movies and was thus "cherry picking". Look over each of your featured topics and make sure there are no gaps in them, like important people or items left out.

I'll see if I can get to your new nominations, I am trying to build up the Zelda LCD and CD-i Zelda games articles. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Michigan State, I am not sure but I think you should perhaps start at discussion at the Featured topics page about what would constitute appropriate articles for the Michigan State University topic. Halloween definitely needs all the Halloween movies included, Microsoft I am not familiar with enough to say, but make sure the three articles you picked exclude no crucial figures or events. On Guitar Hero, why isn't the Rocking the 80's included and its list of songs article? Half Life 2 seems fine, the Nintendo console article directs back to Nintendo FYI, and there are a bunch of other consoles not listed in the topic first and foremost is the Virtual Boy and the handhelds. You could probably get away with the Half Life topic, and the Apple topic also requires you to know that there are no gaps, so make sure nothing and no one important is excluded.

In general, the best way to determine is look at other articles in the category or in the template with the articles you want for a featured topic, and ask the question "Is there a compelling reason or justification to exclude these other articles?" and can't think of one, you can't exclude them. For example, the Final Fantasy topic includes only the main numbered games (except for Final Fantasy Adventure), so there was a clear cutoff that said that all the millions of other Final Fantasy games and remakes and re-releases would not have to be included and would be part of their own Featured topics like Chocobo games and Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles and such. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

My two cents

In the case of "Michigan State University", "Apple Inc.", and "Microsoft", you will probably have to add many more articles to keep from being accused of cherry picking. For "Halloween series" and "Guitar Hero series", you should add the rest of the series, like Halloween IV-IX, Guitar Hero 80s, etc.. For "Half-Life series", the lead article only briefly mentions the Portal game, so you should either exclude it and limit the scope or add the other articles that are loosely connected to the topic. "Half-Life 2" might be good now, but I would recommend including other stuff about it like Content cut from Half-Life 2 and Half-Life 2: Lost Coast. Finally, the Nintendo video game consoles is probably complete as is, though I would recommend expanding it to include the hand held systems. "The Legend of Zelda series" should be good now, though it might be useful to add the unlicensed games. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 15:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC) --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 15:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm new here

Hello i'm new here could u tell me about wikipedia?Pc12345 (talk) 04:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I did NOT commit vandalism. I honestly thought if enough people said support the article became featured. It was an honest mistake, everyone makes them! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xp54321 (talk • contribs) 04:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Call of Duty 4 prestige icon picture

I found a picture of the icons for the prestige mode in the multiplayer mode.

http://paveldolgov.com/downloads.html

hes not stingy with sharing it as long as he gets credit. i thought it might be something people would be looking for on wikipedia. like i did. since i dont know how to edit all that i thought i'd ask someone that did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrod84 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Not yet

He has yet to be approved King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 23:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning

Do not delete my discussion page or violate it again,you need a life and I will block you if you do it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Destry11 (talk • contribs) 07:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I have replied to your request[3] on User talk:Destry11. Let me know if there are any more problems. Ty 11:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Episode One

Sorry for the late reply - I was unable to attend to the article during its painfully brief second attempt at FAC. Good to have some extra hands on board, and you've already brought the article to a far higher standard. Great work! Qjuad (talk) 17:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Lol, nah I enjoy pulling out the tool and doing a little work! I was like wtf at first, but now Im going through them lol « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 19:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah so far so good, and I am also surprised that some werent protected before. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 19:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm tired now, lol. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 20:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I have to get going now, thanks for the workout ;-) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 20:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha yeah we did, look at WP:RFPP, its a little crowded cuz of you, and my signature in everywhere, lol. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 20:26, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I know, you where adding them faster than I could process them. Keep up the good work. Tiptoety ^talk 20:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

No, no: it's fine. :) I just saw they had to be done, and went ahead answering them. :) Acalamari 20:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

AIV

Hi. I just removed two reports that you added to AIV, can you please have a look at the reasoning I gave? Cheers TigerShark (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. TigerShark (talk) 23:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem! :) Gary King (talk) 23:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Hi Gary. It might be best to slow down on the vandal reports, and give some the chance to change. Only two edits doesn't mean they should be blocked; it's best to go through all four warnings if possible. Especially for IPs, but usernames can be reported early if there's quite a few vandalism edits. It's just a suggestion. Best, PeterSymonds | talk 23:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think I'm more adept at WP:RPP, which I've helped out a bunch so far today (check out my additions to there right now :) ) I'll leave vandal fighting to the pros! :) Gary King (talk) 23:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ha, I noticed those RPPs! Great work keeping those admins on their toes! PeterSymonds | talk 23:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Words, Words, Words

hmm... I'm not sure how altering the Words, Words, Words entry so that all of the random 'Strike-through text' are gone is unwaranted... please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.123.179 (talk) 23:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

My apologies, it appeared as though you added them because they were still there when you made your first edited. I have warned the original editor who added that information. Gary King (talk) 23:28, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:RPP, RFA

Yeah, WP:RPP is an area not many prospective administrators go into. The administrator tasks that seem to be the most common are CSD backlogs and dealing with vandals at AIV. In any case, I'll get you a full evaluation in a sec (will take a while to draw up :p). Also note that I'll be in and out the next couple days since I'm currently visiting Princeton and Columbia next. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The evaluation of you as an administrator at RfA primarily takes on four parts: your contributions in terms of administrator work, your contributions to mainspace articles, your knowledge of policy and guidelines, and your conduct with other users, or in other words, your civility. Intangibles are also present, which I will dictate after these.

• Your work in administrator-related areas is pretty solid. I see the occasional AIV report that perhaps is too soon (give at least two warnings before going to AIV), but otherwise seem good. Your CSD contributions seem solid, and your spree of recent RPP reports look good. The category tagging you add also adds the implication that you don't mind doing repetitive work such as clearing backlogs and the like, so that works well towards your chances.
• Your article contributions are probably the most solid part of your portfolio so-to-speak, and seven featured lists and twelve good articles are more than enough to garner points here. You could have one featured list or even one good article and that would probably be adequate for RfA (I'm trying to push my other coachee, User:Vivio Testarossa, to go edit some articles, something he apparently has an aversion towards, and is probably his biggest problem right now).
• Your knowledge of policy and guidelines is primarily shown in CSD tagging, AfD participation, and everyday discussion, all of which you apparently look pretty solid on. I don't see any major gaffes that would cause you problems. Your biggest concern in this regard is giving good answers to the "optional" (in reality, they're not, you pretty much have to answer all the questions thrown at you) questions people give you. I highly encourage you to peruse old RfAs for answers (successful ones naturally) for tips on giving good answers and the like. In doubt, stick to the most civil, neutral solution and the one that follows the relevant policies/guidelines.
• Your civility is pretty much unquestioned. You don't have any bad blood with anyone, and in absence of any evidence to the contrary, people take civility for granted.

The biggest problem I think for you is the length factor. People generally want to see so many months of contributions before an RfA, and while you have a fairly long period of active editing, you have that annoying break in December. That said, I'm being really picky right here, so it shouldn't really be a problem. Also the fact that you have a couple thousand edits in the previous months engenders a lot of good will. The problem that is associated with this is that the person that's becoming an administrator is someone that's going to stick around and help with the project. I think you should be alright though. Other minute stuff includes not self-nominating yourself. In reality, it's perfectly fine, but having another user, especially ones with good contribution histories and name recognition so-to-speak, nominate you adds another dimension to your RfA. I'll nominate you, so no worries here. :So yeah, if you want to go for it, I think you can probably pass right now. I'm starting to think more time might just be overkill. When I was looking into becoming an administrator, I actually received a nomination request a month earlier than when I intended to nominate myself, and passed practically unanimously anyway. You're ready as far as I can tell. When you want to go for it is up to you - you can wait longer to feel more secure, or you can bite the bullet and go for it. Do note that if your RfA does fail, you generally should wait about 3-4 months before trying again, as you'll get a maelstrom of people who will complain about you not following proper procedure before then. I'm pretty confident that you can pass now though. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Fire away before I fall asleep :p Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

There you go. Answer the three required questions and feel free to transclude it at WP:RFA when you're ready. Feel free to check with me concerning your answers to the those questions (they're obviously really important) before you transclude it (you're free to adjust as you see fit before you actually transclude it). Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Add in how you will exercise due caution and care when you initially get the tools and will steadily utilize them more as you learn the ropes. Include in question two the subject material you like to tackle, and especially make note of your future goals that you want to achieve in terms of articles. Also add tidbits of your administrative work or categorization work that you're particularly proud of. Question three looks good. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Your present answers look pretty good. Just elaborate a bit more in question two about the aforementioned editing. Sleep beckons. Best of luck, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Star Wars FT

I keep them up for at least ten days so that people who don't check it often or take a long time to review articles can still comment. When there is such strong support I'll promote it right when the ten days are up. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 05:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Makes sense. Just like WP:FLC, an area where I'm pretty familiar with by now. :) Gary King (talk) 05:25, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Hi Gary, I see you've gone for it. Well good luck! Just as an aside, it's probably best if you don't leave messages for various people to tell them you're at RfA. While it's entirely innocent I'm sure, it can easily be construed as canvassing which can be costly. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 07:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

If it's any help I was going to support your Rfa as you answered my questions with good reasons and without being prompted to give reasons. SunCreator (talk) 23:18, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Altering responses

Hi. I am of course, watching your RfA, and, since in spite of the fact that I feel I must oppose I wish you well, I wanted to bring this up more privately rather than addressing it there. I'm not sure its a good idea to revise your answers by changing them, although you might certainly choose to strike something or contextualize it with a sub-response. I don't know if is addressed directly, and it's possible it isn't, but I should think this would be related to editing your own comments on talk pages. We are discouraged from doing this because it "robs" replies of original context & can be confusing. If I were you, I would restore the original response, strike it and put a comment beneath it explaining the change. YMMV, and I only make this suggestion in the hopes of proving helpful here. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I don't know for sure that there is a proper way, but I think this is how it's handled, and I'm hoping to save you some drama. I remember how insanely stressful RFA is. :/ Anything that avoids more stress to the process is, in my opinion, good. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gary. That was a good call, striking not removing. I'm sorry about the number of "Per Pedro" opposes, and can only reiterate Moonriddengirl's comment about how horribly stressful RFA can be. You've noted, and rightly so, that the opposes are based on your technical and policy based contributions and are certainly not slanted at your wonderful contributions. All of the opposers seem in agreement that if you can fix the AIV and CSD work then your next RFA (if it comes to that, though I suspect this one will fail) will sail through. Again, your encyclopedia building skills are stunning, and that is why we are all here. Adjust the way you approach project space, give it 12-14 weeks of solid improvement in that area and I'll be delighted to support. Very best wishes, and, as ever, Happy Editing. Pedro :  Chat  20:41, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Best of luck in the future, mate. You'll get there one day. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 23:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome page

Hi there Mr. King... Thanks for the welcome thing on my talk page, although I don't really know why you put it there... I have been a member on Wikipedia for almost 3 years...

Anyway, I just thought it was interesting.

It does feel nice to be welcomed though. Good luck on your quest to becoming an admin, btw. I'll take a look at your userpage and maybe I'll vote for you ;)

Cheers

Pip Pip (talk) 08:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

John Waters redirect

I meant to redirect it to Template:John Waters but then I realized that the templates are different and that I had redirected it incorrectly anyway. I meant to undo what I did but I never got around to it. Oversight. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 08:38, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Canadian Duality Flag

Heh, he. I was reading up on some of the sources for the duality flag and finally decided to copy some of the content over when I saw it was already there! Good work. DoubleBlue (Talk) 01:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The second paragraph in the "Alternative flags" section was a little short. I expanded the paragraph, but I was hoping you could look it over. Feel free to go back to your version if you prefer. I don't want to overstep my role as reviewer. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 01:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It's fine, thanks. Gary King (talk) 01:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I promoted the article, as it appears to meet all of the criteria. Thanks for your hard work on the article and your quick responses. I have been reviewing articles to help cut down on the backlog at WP:GAN. If you could review an article in return, it would be greatly appreciated. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Lists of acquisitions

I see you are redirecting some company names to the article on the product arising from the acquisition. This is a problem if that article doesn't mention the company. See WP:R#PLA. Please add some material on the original company to the target article, or else leave the company name as a redlink. For example, I clicked on Dynamical Systems Research from the article List of acquisitions by Microsoft because I was interested to see what contribution that company had made to Windows, but the result was not helpful to me.-gadfium 08:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll be doing that. Gary King (talk) 08:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Great. What you did with 20/20 Software is fine.-gadfium 08:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

CFL

It was a housekeeping request; I don't know anything about any controversies, so if there are, they should be discussed somewhere... I don't know where, sorry. The disambig is right at the top of the Canadian Football League page, so I don't know why there'd be an issue. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense; otherwise there's be a tn more work looking for all the CFLs and changing the direct link to the Canadian Football League, ONLY if that's what it was looking for... making it a manual chore no one wants to do. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Billionaire list

Black billionaires and a couple others are probably fine, I am concerned about several of the rest, but I'll wait to see what happens with the really obvious ones, that copy the look and feel, as well as just not providing new info. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

FLCs

Hi, you currently have several FLCs going on, could you please wait until some of them are finished before nominating any new ones? There is a large backlog right now, so if you would like to help by reviewing some lists, it would be appreciated. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I've already reviewed a few of them that look like they just need a bit more of Support to pass. I'm going to continue to do so. Gary King (talk) 17:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2008

This is the last warning you will recieve. If you continue to delete information and revert contributions you will blocked from Wikipedia. Note contributions are considerd to expand pages or fix edits not to delete. --Geodeo (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Why are you reverting the article a version that is a few days old? I did not remove any information; I moved them to other articles and then linked to them from the article. Please discuss further changes on the article's talk page before making them. Gary King (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of 4FrontSecurity

A tag has been placed on 4FrontSecurity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ukexpat (talk) 00:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hangon tag has been placed on the article. Appears to have saved it. Gary King (talk) 03:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

What's the deal with Microsoft-acquisitions related edits?

Hi, I noticed you added one line specifying what company MS acquired into a lot of articles about MS' products. I don't think those informations are particularly relevant to the articles, at least in the form that you inserted. It states nothing about what the technologies acquired were, nor how they fit into the overall product. The way it is now is nothing more than trivia, that too grossly out-of-place in most articles. A lot better place would have been List of acquisitions by Microsoft, where the table could have been modified to hold one more column - into which MS product did the technology find its way. I am seriously considering reverting your changes. Please at least discuss such changes, especially when they involve a lot of articles. It would save a lot of unneeded efforts on behalf of a lot of editors. --soum ^talk 02:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Apologies on the trivia edits. I haven't done those recently, and instead have created stubbed articles instead of inserting possible trivia-type edits into existing articles. Regarding the list you pointed me to, I was the one that created the list and originally inserted the trivia-type information into existing articles because when I created stubbed articles for that list, some were speedily deleted. However, I've added more information to those articles and they have survived now, so I have continued to do that instead. Gary King (talk) 02:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I was talking of edits like these - [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9] and a lot of others - that you made to link to the articles created. While the creation of the new articles is fine, I do not think linking them from the products-into-which-they-were-merged articles is. You are already being reverted [10]. I know it must have been hard work to dig up all the info and to be reverted is frustrating. Thats why I am asking you to please engage in a broader discussion on how to go about doing this. Like I said, this fragments the information way too much to be useful. Consolidating in a single list (or merging into some pre-existing link) seems a much better solution to me. --soum ^talk 03:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I had made this edit and got this response and this response to that edit, which is why I briefly continued this practice. I haven't done it anymore, though, and don't intend to. Gary King (talk) 03:11, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thats it then. In the future, if you want to do anything that affects a significant number of articles, please try to get a consensus beforehand. That saves a lot of unnecessary drama. Cheers. See you around. --soum ^talk 03:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Any suggestions as to where I should ask for consensus on edits that affect more than one article? Gary King (talk) 03:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Start the discussion in any convenient location, and invite users to comment. You can either personally invite the most active editors on the article or put up a note on the respective wikiprojects. That should give a pretty decent visibility. --soum ^talk 03:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright. Also, I recall that an administrator once mentioned that if a company is a subsidiary of another company that is notable (such as Microsoft) then it is automatically considered notable? Is that accurate? Or not at all? Gary King (talk) 03:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Nope. Notability is not inherited, regardless of any relationship an entity might hold with another notable entity. Same applies for subsidiaries. However, if the creation of the subsidiary (spinning off, acquisition etc) generated enough media buzz, the subsidiary can be considered notable enough to merit its own article (this is not a general statement; it has to be decided on a case-by-case basis). --soum ^talk 03:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Gary King (talk) 03:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:RFA

I had initially dismissed the poor AIV reports and the like due to the other good ones you had made, as well as your continual desire to learn and adapt to the process, but it appears the opposition was more critical in this regard. The amount of questions you were given was also ridiculous - no candidate should have to go through 20+ questions in any given RfA. On both our parts, we perhaps jumped the gun a bit, but you're now pointed in the general direction. Practically all the opposes would be happy to support if you slowed down a bit and gave greater care to your individual actions. My biggest recommendation for the coming months is primarily to slow your pace down. Consider your CSD tags, AIV reports, and AfD !votes with greater care and look at the ramifications of your actions first. 3-4 months is generally the grace period between RfAs, and I would lean towards the latter. Best of luck, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 04:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I count 7 current WP:FLCs!!! and along with all your other great work, you are a true asset to the project; keep up the great work!!! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 07:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I do what I can to help out around here, but the Featured Lists are just a side project — my main goal is to continue to improve my understanding of policy and as I said in my RFA, I intend on helping out by fighting vandalism, but by starting out conservatively. If you don't mind, I'd like to reach you in a few months time if and when I am submitted for another RFA, before the actual nomination, so I can get an honest assessment from you :) I enjoyed that RFA because now I know what I have to improve, and I'm well aware that article contribution ISN'T one of those things! :p Gary King (talk) 07:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I would be honored to give you an assessment, and don't let anyone tell you differently, but content is the most important thing here, people tend to forget what they are supposed to be doing, which is write an encyclopedia. Looking at your nom I cant believe how many questions you were asked, I must have gotten lucky. Anyways, have a good night and feel free to ask me any questions you might have! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the questions, I don't see what the big deal is for everyone, but I guess that's because that was the first time I actually went through the process myself. It wasn't really that overwhelming at all, but I have indeed seen some RFAs with 5 or less questions. Gary King (talk) 08:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Give a really long answer to a question, you won't be asked any more. :-P --soum ^talk 08:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha, that's insane. I'd rather break that up into multiple questions because then at least the subject matter changes and I don't have to write an essay-long answer to a question. It's like an interview for me, so it's all good :p Gary King (talk) 08:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha that's classic Soumyasch, I seriously chuckled out loud. And yeah Gary, I've been over at FLC for a bit now, mostly I close noms now, give a few reviews to interesting lists if I have time, and work on getting some lists to Featured status. Oh and Pedro is superman, I see him everywhere!!! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) is also a tireless contributor. I don't think I've seen you at WP:FLC before, even after I had 7 WP:FLs. Or maybe I just didn't know you until recently. I guess I'll be seeing you more there then. I recall that last month had the highest number of WP:FL promotions ever; maybe we'll break another record this month? :p Gary King (talk) 08:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I myself have been literally LOLling for quite sometime. :-D

@Gary King: I have this page watchlisted. Anyways, you are doing a damn good job with the lists. And all the best for the next time you decide re-RfA. Keep up the vandal fighting, roam about in WP:AN but not at the cost of editorial contributions. We don't have many list specialists. :-) --soum ^talk 08:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

(←)Hey so I saw that you closed a FLC, in the future you don't have to put the closed-discussion template on the page, a bot does that automatically when you add the discussion to the log. And to answer you, you probably haven't seen me around much at WP:FLC cuz I tend to migrate towards sports-related lists, both in reviewing and my own lists. But yes you shall see me around ;-) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and TRM is even higher than Superman, lol! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Soumyasch (talk · contribs), I'll pop into WP:ANI every once in a while, but I'm allergic to WP:DRAMA / WP:WIKIDRAMA. Gonzo_fan2007 (talk · contribs), alright I'll see you around there. I figured I might as well help out, since I'm there so often. Gary King (talk) 08:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Permission

Hey Gary, I was just wondering if you could tell me how to make the template that says how many edits you have made, or tell me how to find out... Thank you! Stealth (talk) 10:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok thank you. Also is it ok wioth you to use things off of your user page? I just want your permission before I do. Thanks Again! --Stealth (talk) 19:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually never mind, thought you ahd some other things.... 1 thing though, did we get Star Wars back onto the Featured articles? If so may I use the "This User has helped X articles become featured" or what ever it is. Thanks Stealth (talk) 20:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh ok then. So when it is over can you send me what to type in? Stealth (talk) 23:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi

I make no accusations about your motives, but the eight supports of Featured material that you made this morning in eight minutes with almost identical comments really makes you look bad. I strongly suggest you revert your contributions and find the time to consider each article properly before weighing in. --Dweller (talk) 11:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I've had my eye on those FLCs for some time now (as I'm sure you can imagine, what with me being there quite often) and so I just spent the time to actually voice my opinion. I had reviewed those articles before but did not decide to show my support until now. Gary King (talk) 18:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, fair enough. Sorry if I came across harsh... tried to AGF but was very hard. I was surprised, as you're hardly a newbie! --Dweller (talk) 19:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Notification

A courtesy note that you are being discussed here. I personally see nothing wrong and voiced my opinions, but you may want to comment. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 20:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out. Commented. Gary King (talk) 20:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

YourYou are welcome. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 20:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

You're :p Gary King (talk) 20:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

You have a reply at WP:VPT (eom)

Thanks for welcoming me. I'm glad to be here with my colleagues from the Philippines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ems amoloza (talk • contribs) 02:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:List of national anthems

Wouldn't hurt to put a general reference for them. You might also want to excise the level two headers with no countries under them. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Michigan State Spartans logo

Image:Michigan State Spartans logo.svg is, according to this, "a registered trademark". I'm not super-familiar with copyright laws, but I'm pretty sure that prohibits Commons use -- you should probably delete the Commons version and revert the Wikipedia version to a fair-use claim. Dylan (talk) 19:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't create the version at the Commons; it's been there for months. Also, I've seen precedence with this type of image, such as at Image:Facebook.svg and Image:Microsoft wordmark.svg, to name a few. Especially in this case, it's basically a big, green letter S, and therefore the argument is that it is such a simple image that it can even be reproduced by mistake and therefore does not allow the original creator to sue any copiers because of that. Gary King (talk) 19:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I just wanted to bring it to your attention in case it was something you had done inadvertently. Sounds fine. Thanks! Dylan (talk) 19:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Contract work

Hi, my name is Megan and I'm wondering if you do any contract work? I'm having a hard time posting and was wondering if i can chat with you. Please email me if you are interested at megans27@hotmail.com. I look forward to hearing from you. Megan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bella1233 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Four Swords Adventure

Sure I'll review it, if you review my CD-i Zelda game article I worked on. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I've never done a GAN review before, and I doubt I'd be very effective. Maybe later :p Gary King (talk) 06:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Zelda topic

First of all, I want to say thanks for all the work you've been putting into the Zelda articles. Getting a Zelda featured topic has been a goal of mine for a while. I don't know if you recognize me or not, but I put heavy work into Majora's Mask during its FAC and rewrote Wind Waker and the Oracle games from scratch to get them to FA. If you're intending to nominate Zelda for FT, I'd like to co-nominate with you. Thanks, Pagrashtak 18:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, looks like I wrote this just in time! I see FSA just became GA—good job. Pagrashtak 18:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Good Article Medal of Merit
		For improving several Zelda articles to Good Article status, thereby making the series a potential featured topic, I hereby award you the Good Article Medal of Merit. Pagrashtak 19:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll add it to my wall :) Gary King (talk) 19:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

FLCs

So, since you have nine open FLCs, how about waiting until some of them close before nominating any more? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I can't do anything in WP:FAC right now because I've got a nomination there, I've got no outstanding issues at any of my nominations at WP:FLC, I'm working on one WP:FTC right now, and I've got a few WP:GAN going on. I also do some maintenance work at WP:UNCAT and vandalism fighting when I'm not working on anything else. The only option I have is to work on WP:GAN, then, which I'd rather not because I normally want to go all the way to WP:FAC when I get something to WP:GAN, and that would therefore increase the backlog of items that I'd need to improve to WP:FA status. Gary King (talk) 02:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Four Swords Adventures - Shadow Battle.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Four Swords Adventures - Shadow Battle.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) 12:33, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:1740594479.01. SCLZZZZZZZ .jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1740594479.01. SCLZZZZZZZ .jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:New sig

Looks good. I often remember people better when they have a distinctive signature (i.e. User:Pedro, User:Keeper76, User:Rudget, etc.). I personally like it better without the space between "Gary" and "King," but that's your own stylistic preferences. Altogether, looks better than the standard one though. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 19:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

open ref

Oh crap! Am fighting too many fires today, dont even look at my talk page! - Thanks MUCH! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Io io editor (talk • contribs)

No problem, it happens! Gary King (talk) 20:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Canadian flag

Do you know anyone good at drawing flags? I'd like to include the flag design recommended to Parliament by Mackenzie King's 1946 committee. the 1946 design description of history from Saskatchewan Council for Archives and Archivists. DoubleBlue (Talk) 01:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

You want to redraw the flag? Shouldn't there be a public domain version of the flag available, if it is indeed notable? Gary King (talk) 01:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know of any pd released version nor even a pic of the original (if it was ever made). It was recommended to Parliament but never approved. Even if there is a pic of the original it would not yet be pd since it was designed less than 70 years ago. I think it would be of interest in the history or alternative sections. DoubleBlue (Talk) 02:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Regardless, I can't really help you with this. I don't know any drawers. The content generally speaking is pretty good on the article right now; the copyediting is where the bulk of the work needs to be right now. Gary King (talk) 02:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

References and notes

Hi, I noticed your recent change to the Social network article. You renamed the automatical list of references as "Notes" and the publications on the subject "references". I wikify quit a lot of articles but I alsways call them "references" and "publications". Now my question is, if there is a standard here one should follow? Could you tell me? Thank you. -- Mdd (talk) 19:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

That can be found at WP:LAYOUT. If you have only footnotes, then typically you'd call it 'References'. If you have footnotes and publications, then they'd be called 'Notes' (for footnotes) and 'References' (for publications). Cheers! Gary King (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, two things:

• The 11 sentences in the Social network you called "notes" are all references to publications, and no notes like footnotes.
• My interpretation of WP:Layout is, that we should call the 11 notes "references" and the listing of publications "further reading".

I don't see any are footnotes in the that article!? -- Mdd (talk) 19:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Footnotes, meaning inline citations WP:IC. Gary King (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for making the adjustments. I guess you came to a similar conclusion as I did. -- Mdd (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:RFA

Are you planning to run soon?--RyRy5 (talk) 20:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I ran a few days ago, at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gary King, and failed. Fortunately, the issues raised are related to understanding policy better, and not civility-related or anything, and so is something that I am gladly working on improving. Maybe I'll run some time later again. I'm currently working on a few Featured Topics, Featured Articles, Good Articles, and Featured Lists, as you can see on my user page. :) Gary King (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I see. I was really good to see that you have been here for 3+ years, your number of quality edits, and the GAN and FAN articles that you promoted. May I nominate you in a few months? You seem like a trusted contributer here.--RyRy5 (talk) 20:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Certainly, I'd appreciate that. I'll probably open an Editor Review some day and ask for input from the people who opposed my first run to see what I can improve. Gary King (talk) 20:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:New user page

I use 1280x800 and it looks fine to me. But yeah, 1024x768 is probably the most common size. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 22:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Link Checker Tool not working for Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

Your Link Checker Tool is not working for Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Could you look into that please? Thanks! Gary King (talk) 04:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yesterday I had switched to using WikiProxy, which is suppose to better for getting the wikitext. But as it doesn't seem to be any better than pywikipedia, I have disabled this. Thanks for the heads up. — Dispenser 11:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Gary King/localize comments.js

I just added User:Gary King/localize comments.js to my monobook and was wondering what I need to change so it is set to my time zone. I'm in -5 or EST. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 23:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

It should be automatically set to your timezone. It uses your computer's built-in timezone. Gary King (talk) 23:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess I should have looked a little closer before asking. It works great! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 00:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Call of Duty

I'll be glad to look at it, it'll probably be tomorrow before I can get to it, I just got home from a trip, so things are a bit hectic. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that'll work for me. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 00:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

An advice

As a fellow vandal fighter, allow me to share a piece of advice here. Fyi, the recalcitrant vandal, 'Cane sg', which I reported at WP:AIAV earlier, has been blocked indefinitely by an experienced admin later [11] contrary to your cursory checks & comments. If u are inexperienced in handling such vandals/trolls or unaware of their prior 'cat & mouse' tactics, do exercise due diligence on their history log profile (including mentioned links), OR refrain from making such comments that may jeopardise the efforts of fellow vandal fighters and embolden such vandals in the long run instead. Besides, I've witnessed quite a handful of good contributors whom having seen their works being vandalised repeatedly, left Wikipedia for good due to non or belated admin action previously. Some of these admins were later taken to task by indignant folks or audits to account fully on their misplaced 'sympathetic' stance towards the vandal(s) concerned, where many lost their credibility & their adminship challenged later. Kindly note. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I will keep it in mind. Gary King (talk) 09:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Do take care to assume good faith nevertheless. If you have concerns, state them, and keep WP:BITE in mind. Administrators have been criticized over such blocks, but it is extremely rare for desysopping to occur (often requires an ArbCom case). In the end, administrators perform these blocks all the time. They deal with the criticism, as expected of them. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll certainly always continue to AGF. If I come across a vandal and am ultimately unsure of the action to take, I would ask for an experienced administrator to take a second look at the case. Cheers. Gary King (talk) 09:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Aldwinteo (talk · contribs), anyways, I didn't mean to make it seem like I was verbally sparring with you. Sorry if it seemed that way! Cheers! Gary King (talk) 09:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

No problemo mate, just a friendly advice in my case. Due to protracted fight with recalcitrant vandals/sockpuppets (like this dude), there're some hard-core vandal fighters (non-admin) whom I know of, who are not tolerant of such easy-going comments made without exercising due diligence in the first place, and they will not hesitate to take on the admins or admin wannabes subsequently in the cases mentioned above. Take care. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 10:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:RfA

I'll keep this brief for now and expand later, as I'm really sleepy. Whether you wish to undergo another RfA is entirely your decision; however, I must stress that ultimately, a RfA is not about content building, no matter what heights you take it to (a conspicuous lack is obviously detrimental though). Through content building, you can demonstrate your knowledge of guidelines and policies, and your ability to work civilly with others, but participation in the core administrator sections is all but necessary if you want an RfA to pass. That said, they can take a backdrop to your content building in the long run, so long as you keep your participation decently high in those areas. This also might solve the pace problem that was brought up at your RfA. Instead of commenting on ten AfDs in one given day, find one every so often that fits your fancy and leave a well supported and detailed opinion, and return to back up your stance if necessary. Revert vandalism during your normal course of editing and report them if necessary rather than constantly looking over a recent edits feed. If you can show a consistent change in judgment in this regard, then it will go well for your future RfA. You can particularly begin to show your hand at discussion sections in the project mainspace; WT:FLC, the village pump, and related items are great simply to present yourself as a knowledgeable and involved editor. Trying for this more slower, concerted, and thought-out approach might be good to resolve the issues brought up at your RfA. As for how long you need to wait, three months is the generally accepted minimum. As for the editor review, I would highly recommend it. Feel free to contact people who opposed at your RfA and ask for feedback. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 10:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay I'll mull over this a bit. Also, is it possible to see a user's edits on a single page besides browsing through the page's history? Gary King (talk) 10:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Can't find the section

Just wanted to say thanks for giving me the image to put on my page. Is there anything else I can put there? Also, are there any more articles I cna help get nominated? Thanks!!! Stealth (talk) 10:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I probably will not work on improving the Star Wars article to Featured status, at least not in the next few days. Maybe in a few weeks :) Gary King (talk) 10:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

FAC, supports, opposes, etc

Here's the boilerplate text I use to explain why I don't do many supports or opposes:

If you look at the other FACs up, you'll see that I've been investigating all the candidates sources, not just yours. While I'd love to have time to devote to every candidate and do a full review of the prose and other aspects, I just don't have the time. It has been a failing of FAs for a while that no one was investigating the sources and commenting on the reliablity or non-reliability of them for quite a while, and I've tried to step up and help with that. Others at FAC specialize in other areas, User:Tony1 does MOS issues and prose, User:Elcobbola does a lot of work on pictures and fair use. I put my comments under "comments" so that folks don't think that I've done a full review, and I won't support or oppose unless I have time to do a full review of everything in the article.

I just can't find the time to review completely everything. I'll very occasionally oppose if the sources are just horrid, but most of the time, things are resolved, but the sources are only one part of the criteria, and I should at least read the article in some depth before supporting. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah alright, makes sense. Gary King (talk) 21:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Twilight Princess

No problem. I was even going to ask for your collaboration (you said "Looks good. I'll try to help out wherever possible with that" in the FTC), but I didn't know if it would be possible as you've been quite busy recently. I'll add your co-nom, no problem. After all, a co-nom gave me my third star (and the one I've given more work and am most proud of), and you seem to be wanting one. igordebraga ≠ 21:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, a star would be nice, too :P Gary King (talk) 21:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Random pages in other namespaces

I just saw [12]. You can add a namespace after / as in Special:Random/Wikipedia talk. See meta:Help:Special page#Random. Here is a random redirect: Special:Randomredirect/Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Very cool. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 00:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: "list not MT"

Its a code to let other admins know that there are still reports left on the list :P.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh...! MT = empty! D'oh. And I've been browsing around WP:MT for so long... :) Gary King (talk) 18:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Ocarina of Time FAC

Thanks for offering to help. Right now I feel like it will be manageable, but I'll let you know if that changes. Pagrashtak 19:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. I'd just like to see it become an FA, and the same goes for the other articles in the FT! :) Gary King (talk) 19:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:PHP Hello World screenshot.png Font

Hello there. Would you be able to tell me the font used in this image? I like it and want to use it but I can't seem to find it anywhere. Thanks, Indochinetn (talk) 18:17, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

It's Monaco 12pt :) I've added it to the image description because I got asked this a lot for some reason :p Gary King (talk) 18:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Indochinetn (talk) 19:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

No problemo :) Gary King (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

Congratulations! A list you have been involved with was selected a WP:LOTD for May. You may want to add the {{ListoftheDayheader}} or {{ListoftheDaylayout}} templates somewhere in your userspace. Other template options are at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/templates. Your list will appear as WP:LOTD twice. If you have any date preferences in May let me know by April 25th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:17, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Check out the voting at WP:LOTD. The winners are listed at the top.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll take a look Gary King (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Late nights

Phoenix, Arizona :-) Haha, I'm a night person and I all my classes are later in the day, so this combination keeps me up at night editing :-) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I beat you then in terms of lateness because I'm in Toronto ;) Gary King (talk) 08:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Canadian, eh? Haha, yeah I think I shall be logging off soon, I got to finish a project and then get some sleep, I usually try and clean out one backlog before I go to sleep, and WP:RFPP was my choice for tonight :-) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:53, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, sounds good Gary King (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Hi Gary. Now you are an admin and knowing you have an interest in Semi-protection, can you take a look at this Wikipedia:Your first article and see if you think Semi-protection is suitable. Situation can be seen from history that newbie editors keep mistakenly creating new articles over the instruction page(and in a few cases vandalism as well). Semi-protection seems a possible way forward but I leave that for you to decide. SunCreator (talk) 15:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an administrator and never said I was. Gary King (talk) 17:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, forgot your not an admin. All the best for another time. SunCreator (talk) 18:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, thanks. Gary King (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:AFD

I hate doing this, but, uhh..., it clearly says "You must sign up here before..." I was going to let you go, but when I looked at the diffs - some were done back in early March, some even in late February before the assignment was even put up. Sorry dude, I really hate doing this. Milk’s Favorite Cookie ^(Talk) 19:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... yeah. Sure. Milk’s Favorite Cookie ^(Talk) 19:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I trust you - no need to provide all the diffs. All I needed was a link to you contribs ;) And of course:

		The AFD Barnstar
		For taking the challenge and making over 50 contributions to AFD, I Milk’s Favorite Cookie (Talk) hereby award you this Barnstar. Congrats! Milk’s Favorite Cookie (Talk) 20:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! :] Cheers. Gary King (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

First FA

Nice one! Keep up the fantabulous work... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Even after a few FTs, FLs, and GAs, this feels good. Gary King (talk) 21:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

A few FTs? I thought the whole of WP had only 39 featured topics so far...! I'm gunning for my second FT right now...! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've got Wikipedia:Featured topics/Star Wars episodes (which was really sweet when it passed, considering its extreme popularity) and currently got Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/The Legend of Zelda titles, which I think will pass in a few days. And yeah, I gotta take over FT while it's still young! :D Gary King (talk) 21:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, well. I'm waiting (10 days gone now) on my second FT too. (I win!). But I see you're planning to take over the whole featured community! I'll be right behind you! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I should stop choosing FTs that are debatable, first of all, heh. Good Articles were getting tiresome, so I'd like to focus on building the articles I've built to GA to FA before moving on to new GAs :) Gary King (talk) 21:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Pixar

Well, thank YOU for noticing that I will be reviewing the article. I will read the article and I will a review on the talk page and let's see what happens. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Gary King (talk) 21:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Please, do be patient. I am almost done with the review. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Cheers! Gary King (talk) 22:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for being patient. I left some notes on the talk page. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look now. Gary King (talk) 23:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Congrats, you now have a GA in your midst. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:32, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 00:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Would you be interested in reviewing an article? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I haven't reviewed an article in a while. I don't think I'd be very effective :| Gary King (talk) 00:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

That's cool, I was just wondering if you could or not. Thanks, though. ;) Also, I'm reviewing Justin Timberlake's article, please be patient. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

← Alright, sounds good. Thanks! I think I'm better as a content builder than a content reviewer, personally :) Gary King (talk) 00:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, its all good with me. ;) The reason I asked was because I've seen your page and you work on a whole lot of stuff and I figured maybe you'd be willing to review an article and stuff. But, its cool, though. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The GA review for Justin Timberlake's article is done. I hope your up for it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Another congrats, Justin Timberlake's article passed. I will take a look at the articles you would like to get to GA and see how I can help in anyway. And, you'd be happy to know that I will be reviewing Eminem's article. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers! Thanks! :) Gary King (talk) 19:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

You have another GA. ;) Sure, I can take a look and give Larry David a review. Hey, do you think you would like to collaborate on an article? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

That's good to hear. ;) I was wondering if you could help with Coldplay's article, since it would be a great article for it to become GA. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Awesome and their first on my playlist. ;) I would like it to become GA, but I would love it if it was an FA. So, is this a cool choice? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool. What do you think needs to be done? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, like a pre-GA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'll take it as a pre-GA. ;) I'll wait for your feedback. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Let me know what you think ;) Gary King (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, totally forgot. Thanks for telling me. I'll keep that in mind and the to-do list is awesome. Also, what problems does the article lack? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Article still needs more references for now, especially before expanding it. Gary King (talk) 01:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on getting refs and stuff. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

This is also a useful book. Gary King (talk) 01:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to use it and would this ref. work? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

BBC is definitely a reliable source. Gary King (talk) 01:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. But, would it work if its added about X&Y being delayed from its previous release? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah Gary King (talk) 01:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I just wanted to check. Hope I'm not bothering you. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem, but since this discussion is Coldplay-related, it might interest other editors; also, see here: Talk:Coldplay#Coldplaying.com_is_not_a_reliable_source this isn't directed at you, of course, because other editors add it as a ref, but I'd just like to point it out. (Other articles have similar lists of what websites are not reliable, because they are commonly added) Gary King (talk) 01:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Really? I never knew that, since I'm off working on other articles. I'll, remove the links from the article and try to find other ones. Again, thanks for the know. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Music biographies seem easier to do than game articles, actually, because music has Rolling Stones, BBC, etc. as references while most media outlets don't cover video game news. So it should be easier to find appropriate refs for this article. Gary King (talk) 01:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm finding newspaper articles, reliable newspapers, and adding the refs. for that. I'll look for some more refs. and see where it goes. ;) BTW, this is one of the hardest articles I'm working on right now. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Coldplay is a pretty popular band in mainstream media so it should be easy to work on. Flag of Canada just passed FA and I worked on it, and that is arguably harder :) Gary King (talk) 02:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll give you that. Coldplay is in the middle and Flag of Canada is high. ;) Hey, do you think after Coldplay you would be interested in Timbaland's article? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, sounds good. Gary King (talk) 02:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll take a look at Kanye West's article, after I review Larry David's article. Also, don't you think its a bit early to have nominated Coldplay's article for GA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

←Not really, because I'm still continuing to work on it, and if the reviewer has any concerns to bring up, that's even better because we can all work on them to fix them and help improve the article in general. Gary King (talk) 19:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, well that was my concern when I saw that you nominated Coldplay's article at the GA page. But, I guess your right about the whole concept of it. I'll continue looking for more refs. and hopefully ones that are "acceptable" to the article. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Gary King (talk) 19:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Larry David is up. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Another GA. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 20:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Coldplay

All right, I didn't look hard enough on the Talk page for the article. "Vandalism" is a little harsh, though.

Edit: nevermind, saw you removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drnorton (talk • contribs)

Yep, I just hit the wrong button. Sorry! I'm glad you saw that I removed it immediately after placing it. :) Gary King (talk) 21:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome...?

Thanks for the welcome, but I created an account some time ago, and needed a break at the beginning of this month (which was originally supposed to be retirement, but doesn't appear as if it will turn out to be). I intend to return to my normal account once the technically-enforced wikibreak has expired. --24.218.182.169 (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Isn't that cheating then? :) Gary King (talk) 21:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and are you perhaps working on an FT related to music? (Noticed the rapid-fire GA noms you have been putting up recently.) If so, what is the theme? I've noticed rock and hip hop artists, but they don't really seem to be related. --24.218.182.169 (talk) 21:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Nope, I'm just working on artists that I like. Maybe I should build a music FT soon, since I've got FT experience and music articles experience now. Gary King (talk) 21:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

CapitalR's RFA

Sorry, fixed. Spencer^T♦C 01:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, great. Cheers. Gary King (talk) 05:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Metroid

Alright, you are bolder than I, the previous GA nominator of Metroid Prime 3: Corruption. But of course you didn't see previous complaints about the disjointed mess in "Reception" and the lack of references in "Plot" (the first, I've been too lazy to turn the "individual reviews" to "general view", such as the one I did in Metroid Prime; the second, went looking for screenshots and videos of cutscenes to reference quotes, but got distracted by other things - specially what I could do for Twilight Princess). But OK, it takes long for someone to review articles in the GA backlog, and I'll try making it now (in the meantime, can you help fulfill Fuchs' requests in the TP FAC?). Also, congrats on your first FA star! igordebraga ≠ 03:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look at those and see what I can do about them, although I might also just wait for a reviewer to take a look at the article and then address any other concerns that they might have, at the same time. I'll see what I can do with TP. Gary King (talk) 07:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Rfa thanks

Thanks for supporting my recent request for adminship which was successful with 89 supports, 0 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately all I can offer is this lame text thanks rather than some fancy-smancy thank-you spam template thingy. I was very pleased to receive such strong support and to hear so many nice comments from editors whom I respect. I’ll do my best with the tools, and if you ever see me going astray don’t hesitate to drop a note on my talk page. Thanks again for your support!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:01, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It was no problem. I'm glad it passed unanimously! Gary King (talk) 05:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

National Anthems

Hi Gary,

I made an amendment to a Wikipedia article entitled 'List of National Anthems'.

The amendment I made was to include the national anthem of Cymru / Wales. The reason for the amendment was that Wales is a nation and that it has an anthem. The logical conclusion being that the anthem would, therefore, be a national anthem, which should be included in a list of national anthems.

My amendment has been deleted and the previous article reinstated.

I've looked at the article again and I can see that all the nations listed are noted in the English language, rather than their own language. I assume that this is the reason for the deletion. The reason I chose to include the Welsh name for Wales was because the Welsh national anthem is in the Welsh language. I see now that this was inapproprate. Sorry.

I would like to resubmit an amendment adding the national anthem of Wales, but before I do so I would like to ensure that the reason for the deletion was for purely linguistic reasons, as I don't want to make further amendments if there are other reasons.

I'd welcome your advice.

Best regards,

Dai caregos. (Dai caregos (talk) 09:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC))

You can add Wales to List of anthems. There has been some debate, and it has been concluded that Wales is indeed a country, but it is a constituent of the United Kingdom. Gary King (talk) 17:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gary,

Thanks for taking the time and trouble to respond.

I had a look at the List of Anthems you mentioned. The three other constituent countries of the United Kingdom are listed.

Northern Ireland is noted as not having a recognised anthem.

The entry for Scotland says: see National Anthem of Scotland and that article begins with the sentence "There is no official national anthem of Scotland"

The entry for England states: "see Proposed English National Anthems" That is: they don't have one.

So, of the four constituent countries of the United Kingdom, only Wales actually has a National Anthem.

The entries for both England and Scotland use the phrase 'National Anthem', from which I conclude that if either nation were mature enough to have their own anthem, it would be listed under 'List of National Anthems'.

It seems that Wales doesn't get to be listed under 'List of National Anthems', despited actually having one, simply because some other nations don't make the list - because they they don't have a national anthem to list. The logic of that escapes me.

You mention that there has been some some debate previously. Was it concluded that a country with a national anthem shouldn't be included on a 'List of National Anthems' because some different country didn't have a national anthem?

I wonder if you would reconsider.

All the best,

(Dai caregos (talk) 20:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC))

The issue isn't regarding whether or not any of the other constituent countries have a national anthem or not, but whether or not we should include the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom and its constituent countries, or only the constituent countries. This has been brought up in most country-related lists, not just this one. The final verdict is that only the United Kingdom should be included to represent the constituents. Gary King (talk) 20:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gary,

I see where you're coming from now. I admire the consistency in this article. Nevertheless, being consistent doesn't necessarily make something correct. The list that appears under the title 'List of National Anthems' is acually a 'List of National Anthems of States', making the article both inaccurate and misleading. I assume that these are among Wikipedia's least popular adjectives.

In my opinion, an article entitled 'List of National Anthems' should contain a list of national anthems.

Please consider renaming this article and including national anthems under the article entitled 'List of National Anthems'

Cheers,

(Dai caregos (talk) 21:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC))

I'll bring it up at the WP:FLC for a discussion regarding this. Gary King (talk) 22:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Gary. Do you know, yet, when the discussion is due to take place? You mention that 'this has been brought up in most country-related lists, not just this one', so I imagine that lots of other people feel they've been misled too. Could you tell me if anyone will be puting forward this point of view at the WP:FLC? Cheers, (Dai caregos (talk) 09:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC))

I think you have brought up a lot of good points, so I have moved the article to List of anthems by country. I think that greatly clarifies the scope of the list, because nation can be interpreted in many ways, while (at least on Wikipedia), a country is considered to be one that is listed at List of countries. This is so that if anyone has a problem with a country listed or not listed there, then they can bring it up on that list (which is Featured), rather than bringing it up with the many other country-related lists that exist :) I hope the title change clears it up. Gary King (talk) 16:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I think that is a very reasonable decision, which should remove any confusion. Thank you for your patience Gary. All the best, (Dai caregos (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC))

Hi Gary, will changing the name of this article change anything linked to it automatically? I only ask because I noticed that on the article entitled 'National anthem', under the section 'See also' it has a link to 'List of national anthems', which links into the article now named 'List of anthems by country'. Obviously, there isn't a 'List of national anthems' any more. Would you like me to edit the article 'National anthem', and any others I find, to show the correct link, if they don't change automatically? Cheers (Dai caregos (talk) 15:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC))

Sure, you can go ahead and change those links. The links don't change automatically, but if they are clicked on, then they automatically redirect to the new article title at List of anthems by country. I've edited {{Lists by country}}, a template which appears on many pages, so that the link there is the correct one now, also. There's also a list that shows all pages that link to List of national anthems; the list appears to still show some of the articles that use the template I recently changed, however, meaning that they actually don't link to the redirect anymore. Hopefully the page auto-updates itself soon, but if you want, you can go through the items there to see which ones link to the redirect page. Gary King (talk) 18:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

BECK

Hi. I just noticed all your improvements to the Beck article and wanted to say they're much appreciated. I noticed that one of your edits resulted in a reference to Johnny Cash that no longer made sense where it was. I don't think the reference is needed, so I deleted it altogether. But I thought I'd let you know in case you want to fix it another way. Thanks again! Candy (talk) 06:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a good edit. Thanks! I removed the Johnny Cash sentence because I couldn't find a reference for it, and it did not appear to be extremely important, so that is why I removed it, by the way. Gary King (talk) 07:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree it was not important. Beck may well have said it, but it doesn't seem worth the effort of trying to verify it. Candy (talk) 16:18, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Believe me, I tried, and couldn't find it :) I'm not doubting it's accuracy, but if I can't find it after more than 10 minutes of searching, then it probably isn't notable enough to worth mentioning. Gary King (talk) 18:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Larry David.jpg

Hello. I notice you changed the license information on an image uploaded by another user. Did the other user authorize you to do so, or do you have information about the image license from some other source? Do you have source information for Image:Larry David.jpg? Thanks, -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:04, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not sure why I did that to that particular image on that day, a few weeks ago. I don't usually even bother dealing with images which I am uncertain of their license. Anyways, thanks for resolving that for me. Gary King (talk) 21:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:FT pass

Hi, Gary. I was wondering if you minded if I was bold and edited Template:FT pass so that it includes the date of the pass, similar to how Template:FL pass does? Regards, -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 00:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead, especially since I'm not using it right now... :) Gary King (talk) 01:07, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Heh, thanks! I was having problems for some reason. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem! I like to think that I'm pretty experienced working with templates by now, especially as a web developer by trade :) Gary King (talk) 05:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

That should help! Any chance {{FT-star}} could be used instead of {{FA}}? :) -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

done Gary King (talk) 05:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you :) -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 06:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Disarobics

This makes me wonder, "web content" applies to anything found on the web. If the meme is about the video posted to the web, it's eligible to be deleted per A7 because it's web content. ViperSnake151 00:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

That is a fair argument. I interpreted it as a video as the bottom line, though, but either way can be argued :) Gary King (talk) 01:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

DYK and Triple Crown Awards

Just noting that if you're creating that many articles (300 !?!), you might want to investigate WP:DYK, and by extension, WP:CROWN. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll definitely keep those in mind because they're always fun to try and obtain (an editor sometimes needs something to aspire to!), but I'm primarily focusing on the trifecta of WP:FT, WP:FA, WP:FL... and WP:GA, which I should probably also include, since I seem to be cranking them out pretty voluminously lately. A lot of the content that I want to work on already has articles, so I usually work on those. Plus, a lot of articles that should be FA, aren't! For shame, for shame... :) So I gotta work on those. As I mentioned before to you, (I think? I tend to go on rambles a lot about — they are different from complaints in that I usually try to do something about them :)) it's sad to see a lot of good topics in such poor condition. Sad... </ramble>

I like to think of myself as an article fixer-upper. That's what I've been doing lately, anyways; fixing up articles that need a bit more to go to get to GA or even FA! The state of some articles are enough to make a man weep. Excelsior! Gary King (talk) 06:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Kanye West

Kanye West is done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I will take a look at it. Gary King (talk) 23:49, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

GA. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I did want to take a break, but I'll give the Killers a GA review. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Gary King (talk) 23:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Link Checker Tool not working for Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

Also, if we are watching a page, is it possible if when we use your tool to save a page, it saves the watched status, too? If I am watching a page and use the link checker to change URLs, it will have the watchlist checkbox unchecked. But, I guess this may not be able to be done because the script can't check if the page is watchlisted by a user or not? Gary King (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

This is not possible without having the user log into the tool. I've since added the minor and watch checkboxes to the form printout to try to mitigate it. — Dispenser 06:24, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

For your Readability tool, it does not work for Timbaland. Gary King (talk) 21:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

This would seem to be a server load issue as the tool did not retrieve the edit page at the time. — Dispenser 06:24, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

It still does not work for Timbaland. The errors for certain articles are consistent in that if I run the tool on another article, it works, then immediately again on the problematic article, then the same error occurs. Gary King (talk) 06:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Should be fixed now, I had only checked with the non-beta version of the tool. — Dispenser 19:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, all good. Gary King (talk) 19:10, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For your tireless contributions of over 1000 edits in the month of April, I award thee with an Original Barnstar! Luksuh 16:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 19:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Lea Miller

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Lea Miller, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rtphokie (talk) 18:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Christopher Purdy

Hi Gary, i edited an article headlined "Christopher Purdy" to include the information that he is a homosexual. (1) this is true. I know him well and he is quite open about this (2) do you know who he is? no? well that is because his article was created by his college friends (of whom i am one) as a practicle joke, and much to our suprise it remained up. If you are going to report me for vandalism then please check the facts yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.19.8.193 (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Please include a reference for this if it is true, because it's a pretty controversial claim to be making in most cases without using any references to back it up. Gary King (talk) 20:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars episode 2 and episode 3

I'm not involved with it, but I just thought I'd give you the heads up of these two articles undergoing a WP:FAR. After you've recently got the Topic featured again, it'd be ashame to see them knocked down and perhaps cause the topic to be delisted also. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 22:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll check it out. Gary King (talk) 23:10, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Dead link

Thanks for noticing that the link on my user page is dead. I had not noticed it. I will try to contact the publisher to see why the link was removed. Joelito (talk) 16:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem Gary King (talk) 18:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

This decline

How can a request of an IP to be blocked on the basis of evading a ban be denied for an old warning? Evading a ban is an immediately blockable offense, and the puppetmaster had already been blocked, has had three of his socks. I provided links to the puppetmaster's identity and three of his socks that had already been blocked for performing exactly the same edit. Don't you think being blocked four times for the behaviour is sufficient warning? As for it maybe being someone else, how many people do you think are possibly obsessed with changing the number of black Hondurans from 150K to 350K? It doesn't seem like a widespread area of controversy which is inclined to draw in a wide range of people maniacally inserting the same false number into Wikipedia.

What would I have had to write to make you act instead of decline? As it is, it took several more hours to get the situation under control, with several more reversion cycles and finally going to WP:RFPP to get action taken. A lot more effort, a lot more time, and a lot more vandalism. I really need to understand how to get these things acted on at AIV, and I'm obviously not putting in enough for AIV to recognize blatant vandals and block them.Kww (talk) 20:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't decline the report. SorryGuy (talk · contribs) did, per here. Gary King (talk) 20:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Timbaland

Hi im reviewing the Timbaland article, im having major concerns with the article and im not even half way through it. Ive made a huge list of improvements needed for the first half, i am inclined to fail the article, do you have the time to handle these issues or is it worth withdrawing. Let me know at my page, if you still want to go ahead i will continue adding. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 12:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I am willing to go forward and fix the issues at hand. Cheers. Gary King (talk) 18:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure no problem, i will continue adding to te list tonight, ive only just woke up so would like to clear my mind before getting to it. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 20:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, im done, ill leave you to it, dont be afraid to come call me if your confused on anything, elsewise let me know when your done. CheersRealist² ('Come Speak To Me') 22:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Im very happy that you respect my reviews enough to ask me, i didnt mean to insult your skills when i sent you my first message. I only just realised how strong a contributer you are from your user page. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 03:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, no problem Gary King (talk) 03:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Ill probably go for some more, i know a lot on coldplay so thats a possibility. I usually only assign myself to one review at a time, so that i can concentrate and pay full attention.Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 03:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I will be ready for your review. I know that Coldplay is not yet up to stuff for GA status, because it is going to be a collaboration between me a few other editors, but I have been especially busy in the past few days so I have not had a chance to attend to it as much as I would have liked. But I will certainly address all of your concerns very quickly. Gary King (talk) 03:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

See Timbaland talk page, give you something to do while im away, night, night. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 04:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, see the talk page, cheers. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 16:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

It passed well done, im not sure if the old fail template needs removing from the talk page. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 18:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

I went ahead and did the deletions related to 'O Canada'. --User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Gary King (talk) 18:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Man, you are just a machine. Right after you finished with the Canadian flag, you tackled the article on the Canadian anthem. I wish I could have done more, but enjoy the recordings I gave months ago. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, but if you take a look at my user page, you'll see that I also padded the time between the Flag and the Anthem with time spent editing other articles :) I'm happy that Canada is already FA, so I don't have to work on that. It was fully protected only a few weeks ago because of some disputes, so I can only imagine the difficulties that I would face if I had to build it up at this point! Gary King (talk) 03:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

It took me over 2 years to get Belarus to a featured article, so I know the burden of making an article on a country FA. Anyways, still, good work. I think that if you like for something to do, Order of Canada could use an overhaul. It is a Featured Article already (I made it featured about 2 years ago) and it needs to be updated to current FA and Wikipedia standards. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:04, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Right now, I'd like to make National symbols of Canada a GA in order to create a Featured Topic around it, including O Canada and Flag of Canada with it. Feel free to expand it; I don't think the Canadian government has an official list of national symbols, does it? Also, now that I think about it, it was your Belarus national symbols topic that inspired this one. Gary King (talk) 03:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

A lot more articles are needed in order for an topic about Canadian topics to become featured. When I did the Belarusian symbols topic, I made all articles Featured and had to make the parent article at least a GA. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I've got one successful Featured Topic nomination and one currently being nominated, so I've got some experience there. I'll see how much work I need to squeeze a FT out of Canadian articles. Gary King (talk) 10:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

By way of explanation ..

Hi! You just declined an AIV report of mine as nfw. I can see why, but it looked like a final to me - the text of VoABot II's most recent warning says it's a uw-v4 - honest! I'm totally confused by this, and I have posted this [13] to the bot's talk page to see if VoA can explain. Philip Trueman (talk) 19:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not a final; it's not even a standard template. It's normally only reserved for the bot to use, because the bot should not give out final warnings since all of its edits are automated, therefore it cannot actually judge when a user deserves a final warning. They should be used sparingly. Gary King (talk) 19:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah!! So the bot is using a non-standard template and calling it the same name as a standard one here. That makes sense. But why should uw-v4's be used sparingly, and not by a bot? uw-4im's, I would agree, but uw-v4's? If they were used sparingly, no-one would ever get blocked. Philip Trueman (talk) 19:41, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Because the warning template applied by the bot does not warn the user that they may be blocked. That is the important part of the final message to give to vandals. I'm not an administrator, by the way—just helping out! :) Gary King (talk) 19:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

That's true, but it's not an answer to my question. Why do you think uw-v4's should be used sparingly? I see no policy to that effect. Or did you mistakenly think the bot's warning was labelled a uw-4im? Philip Trueman (talk) 19:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm saying that a bot shouldn't be allowed to use uw-4s because it can't always differentiate vandalism from not vandalism. Gary King (talk) 19:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Then I respectfully disagree. Humans don't differentiate with 100% accuracy either, and the bots make very few mistakes. And when matters are taken to the next stage, and the bot reports to AIV, then any blocking will be done by an admin. After all, the policy is "vandalism following a final", not "vandalism following a justified final". Philip Trueman (talk) 20:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Then shouldn't this be taken to the bot owner since the bots don't use final warnings? It does not explicitly state that the user will be blocked if they continue to vandalize, which is an important part of the final warnings. Gary King (talk) 20:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

ClueBot gives finals - [14]. I'll see what VoA says in response to my message (quoted above). Philip Trueman (talk) 20:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright; I got no problem with bots giving finals. That's a good point that ClueBot gives finals, but it only gives them for multiple page blankings I believe. Gary King (talk) 20:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Scarborough ref

Hi. I noticed you added a citation to an existing ref in this edit. However, I had added the Fact tag specifically because that citation fails to make a comparison to the rest of the GTA. The comparison is to the rest of the city. Either the sentence needs to change, or a different reference needs to be sourced. Here's the salient bits from the article:

"We are the safest division in the city," he said. "You are safer in 42 Division than in any other division in Toronto."

Thoughts? Mindmatrix 20:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Please check the added quote. Should be more accurate. Gary King (talk) 20:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. I'll see if I can find the source statistics for that, so we can touch up Crime in Toronto too. Mindmatrix 21:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

AIV report

• A110011a (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

My bad, I coulda sworn the user vandalized after a final warning. Will report again if vandalism continues. Thanks for your efforts at WP:AIV, Cirt (talk) 20:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem; but yeah, even a single minute difference can cause an incorrect report, and it can change the intentions of the vandal significantly (i.e. if the vandal stops after final warning, then they don't mean as much harm as someone who still vandals after several final warnings.) Gary King (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

O Canada

Well, it looks like someone beat me to it. Congratulations on getting O Canada to GA level, and congratulations as well on getting Flag of Canada to FA level. You've done some great work on those articles. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I wasn't expecting for someone to review the article so soon, but looks like that's what happened! Thanks for the interest, anyways. Gary King (talk) 00:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Please take a look

Hi Gary, I've added a js page to Wikipedia:Tools/Optimum tool set#Super fast upgrade. Please take a look, to make sure there aren't any potential problems.

I'd appreciate it.

Thank you.

The Transhumanist 00:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure!

I'll review Prime 3, but from now on, check all the bullet points on this list before you ask, so we can get the obvious, recurring questions out of the way;

1. As always, fair use rationales need to be specific as to exactly what is demonstrated in the image and why it is significant.
2. Three paragraph lead; first says what the game is, who made it, when it was released; second paragraph, summarize the plot, third paragraph, tell us how it was received (reception).
3. No paragraph unreferenced.
4. All scores in score box referenced, and include sales data.
5. Check for free use images that can be used.

Let me know when you did those things :) Great work lately by the way, incredible amount of improvement across so many articles, you'll have dozens of barnstars soon. And I really hope you can save the two star wars FA's. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll get on them right away. Currently striking completed items. Gary King (talk) 11:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

All done Gary King (talk) 13:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Facebook

How is the fiscal information related to the founding of Facebook? The first paragraph talks about the founding and its history, and then the last sentence talks about the financials of the company?

Well, put it somewhere else, then. It's important, especially for a private company that doesn't otherwise need to disclose its financials. It's probably the only figure we have so far that isn't an estimate. Wikipedian06 (talk) 02:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I've added it to another part of the article. Gary King (talk) 03:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Metroid/Zelda

Well, thanks on helping Corruption pass. And responding your TP affirmation "don't have my Wii with me right now"? Picture search, anybody? (the last one only covers the beginning, and there are watermarks, nothing a little editing can't fix) igordebraga ≠ 03:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to add one of those. When I search Picasa, it only returns a blank page. Gary King (talk) 03:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't search (the pics don't have keywords...), just look and see if any fits. I don't know what pic to choose. But I suggest one with Wolf Link (like this, or this). igordebraga ≠ 05:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Time stamp edit

What's going on here? Pagrashtak 20:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Argh, I thought I fixed those. It was because of a script I was using; it is fixed now, but articles that were saved when the script was broken still has the text saved. Gary King (talk) 20:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Copyedit request for Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

Hi. I'll look through it, but I suggest you also ask User:Finetooth. He enjoys copyediting and is a far better copyeditor than I am. Epbr123 (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I will definitely do that. Gary King (talk) 21:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, as he said below, he is not able to copyedit my article. Gary King (talk) 21:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Copyediting request

Hi Gary, I'd help, but I'm nearly overwhelmed just now with another article at FAC, peer reviews, and keeping promises I've made about other articles. If things settle down, I'll see what I can do. That isn't likely to happen any time soon, alas. My best. Finetooth (talk) 21:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, thanks anyways. Gary King (talk) 21:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Striking others' remarks

Please do not strike my remarks at FAC. I will strike them when I consider them addressed. Thanks --Laser brain (talk) 21:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, apologies. Gary King (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, just one of those etiquette things. BTW, I tried the CoD 4 demo and I found it very hard to distinguish enemies from my team. I kept either shooting guys that were on my team or walking right past enemies. The last one I played is CoD2 which I loved - hard to get used to 4. --Laser brain (talk) 22:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a lot more fast-paced and hectic. I think part of the reason for its creation was to pander to the Halo 3 crowd. Gary King (talk) 22:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll never be able to keep up with modern day shooters...maybe due to my lack of skills. Good ol' Halo 2 for me, I think. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 10:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Facebook

I saw your request, and I'll be glad to look at it, but probably tomorrow night. I'm on the road and working a horse show, so tonight's limited Wiki time was devoted to catching up on two days worth of FACs. Tomorrow I should be around enough to look at Facebook. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, thanks! I've also gone through the article and removed any unreliable sources I could find, so if you find anything, then I should smack myself on the forehead :) Everything on there should be reliable, but some may possibly be questionable by you and I will do my best to explain why I think it should be reliable. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 06:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: No need to tell people to sign their posts

I get your point, but the fact that they're newbies is the reason I do it. If they're new, telling them to sign begins to familiarise them with policy. And the chances are they'll come along later to ask something like:

How do you get your name after what you write?

So I'm just answering that kind of question in advance. I'm not saying you have to, and I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just giving my piece...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 10:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Justin Timberlake filmography

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Justin Timberlake filmography, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Powers ^T 12:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The Killers

Thanks for being patient and stuff, cause I've given the Killers a GA review. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll get to it ASAP! Thanks! Gary King (talk) 06:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome and you have another GA in your midst. And, I'll go with what you said about me being "bold". ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

FLC

Hi Gary. I'd rather you didn't strike my comments. It's not your place to decide whether I'm satisfied with your responses to my comments. Respond by all means, just don't strike other peoples' talk page contributions unless/until they indicate that's OK. Cheers --Dweller (talk) 12:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, unstriked Gary King (talk) 17:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Tireless Contributor

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		So I think I count 10 lists at FLC, two articles at FAC, and six at GAN! I think you've broken Wikipedia. Keep it up! Drewcifer (talk) 18:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but I've only just begun. Muahahaha... *evil laugh* Gary King (talk) 18:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Scarborough, Ontario

The article Scarborough, Ontario you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Scarborough, Ontario for things needed to be addressed. SriMesh | talk 00:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you from Horologium

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed unanimously with the support of 100 editors. Your kindness is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Wizardman, Black Falcon and jc37 for nominating me. — Horologium

Response Gary King (talk) 03:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Scarborough Refs

I am using the archived newspaper records that are available through the Toronto Public Library website [15]. You need a library card to access the databases. All access is free.

To find recent articles, use "Find a Magazine or Newspaper". Enter "Toronto Star" or "The Globe and Mail". Choose a database from the list. You can get full text articles (no pictures). I have found articles are available for about 2 years. Prior to this there are just titles.

To find older articles, images of pages from the Toronto Star are available from 1894 - 2004; for the Globe and Mail it's from 1844 - 2003. To find these articles, click on the button labelled "Find Articles in Magazines and Newspapers". At the bottom of the page click on "List of Databases". Look for "Globe and Mail - Canada's Heritage from 1844" or "Toronto Star - Pages of the Past", both entries lead to the same place. Choose your newspaper. From there is a fairly easy to use search dialogue.

I have found both of these facilities useful for doing research on local history. Hope this helps. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 03:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow, very cool. I've got an appropriate library card so I can access it. I should begin to use these research databases more, although it'd be nice if they had a simpler interface akin to Google :) Gary King (talk) 04:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Scarborough Geography

I am doing some work on this section. I will be doing a minor rewrite soon. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 12:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 17:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Coldplay

Hi Gary. Sorry, I seriously didn't notice the comment there (and now that I see it, I don't understand how I could not have noticed it :). On the other hand, I disagree with the use of "are" in this context. As User 137.222.215.52 stated on the talk page discussion, "Coldplay is a band" but "Coldplay are splitting up" sounds to me like correct usage (at least in Australian usage, which I presume would be very similar to UK usage). Ronline ✉ 03:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally I don't know which way it should be, but after deciding to help improve the article, I would rather abide by the article's discussions of the past rather than doing things 'on my own'. So, if you disagree with this usage, please bring it up on the talk page. Also, similar British band articles use this same verbage, so I would rather not change it unless I decided to do so for other British band articles. Cheers. Gary King (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Webcal (company)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Webcal (company), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Webcal (company) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Webcal (company), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 23:01, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

"As a matter of course"

a matter of course, as in, it happens every time, without consistently meaningful forethought. You might consider changing your "anti-vandalism" roll-back script to provide options beyond labeling well-intentioned and factually valid edits as "Vandalism" when reverting them. Or, if this is simply the way the recent-change patrol folks handle things now, you may wish to consider relaying that suggestion to the script maintainer(s). It's a tad unwelcoming, user talk page message aside.

72.75.232.127 (talk) 05:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you--that was very reasonable of you. I therefore move (more civilly, I suppose, as I should have been initially) to the question I should have asked in the first place: are you questioning the verifiability of my contribution, or the significance, or something else? The Sabres are, I posit, a significantly notable example of the dual-performance phenomenon, as a major professional sports franchise with a cross-border fanbase. (A large number of season ticket holders are Canadian, and Buffalo is a United States-Canada border city.) If it's a matter of verifiability, do you simply see the need for a citation that the practice is observed? Thanks.

72.75.232.127 (talk) 06:06, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

A reference would be appreciated, especially since I am working towards building the article to Featured Article status. Gary King (talk) 06:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the Sabres don't have a page explicitly outlining the policy, but there's always, er, Youtube: video shows an example of the practice being observed at HSBC Arena prior to a game between two American teams during the 2006 Stanley Cup Playoffs. If you search YouTube, you'll find a number of other examples of the practice. 72.75.232.127 (talk) 06:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I readded the information with a reference that I found. Gary King (talk) 06:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Periodical archives are a wonderful thing. I thank you for your effort. 72.75.232.127 (talk) 06:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Iron Man FAC

I always wait for the DVD, and I have other film articles to attend to. But in a couple of weeks, I will go to GAC. Alientraveller (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Sort template metadata

The template metadata that you have added is a very useful column. Could you sort the keys in it alphabetically, though, so that accessdate is always before publisher, etc.? This would make it easier to sift through a lot of links and see which ones are missing information, and it would make it easy to compare between two links. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 04:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I typically use the sort tables bookmarklet. I may add sorting in the future but the problem currently is how I layout the tables on the cached pages. — Dispenser 04:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The bookmarklet kind of helps, in that it shows the links that have accessdate then publisher, and then publisher then accessdate, but it doesn't actually sort the lines in each cell. Gary King (talk) 04:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, the parameters are now sorted. Before they were in whatever order they were inputted. Also fixed the archiveurl bug. You may want to also take a look at the Ajaxy script. — Dispenser 22:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: the Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

Whoops. Looks like I was in the middle of reviewing it when you submitted your request (I edit conflicted with Laser Brain). In any case, I rarely do copyediting unless it's on a subject I'm knowledgeable about and have an interest in. BuddingJournalist 17:59, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Deletion request

Done. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Nailed that one also. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

BS

		The Original Barnstar
		For the completion of 10000 edits at the time of the giving of this Barnstar, you deserve this.  Marlith (Talk)  23:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Timeline of the CFC Crisis

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Timeline of the CFC Crisis, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Sorry about the template! Bearian (talk) 00:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Would like your opinion on GA review for White Mountain art

Hi there. I'm new to GA review, but I guess I know how to pick 'em. For my 5th review I chose White Mountain art. You may have seen the comments on the GAN talk page. The review has been rather confusing. I wrote a review, but neglected to check to see that it was still nominated. Although I found what I considered to be multiple issues with MOS, OR and POV, it had been passed by another editor, User:Jack Bethune. User:Malleus Fatuarum delisted it and I posted my comments on the talk page and put the article on hold. Jack Bethune, in turn, took my suggestions and recommended, disagreed with, or advised the principal author to disregard my comments. The principal author, User:JohnJHenderson is now understandably confused. So I'm asking for experienced GA reviewers to look at the article and the talk page and offer some kind of consensus as to what he should do to bring it to GA. I appreciate anything you can do. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 01:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Prose size script

Hi, The script seems to be working OK for me. It's possible something was just timing out when you tried earlier. Is it working for you now? If not, was it one particular article which gave this error, or did you get the same behaviour on all articles? I notice you added a number of other scripts around the same time, maybe there is a conflict with one of them. Dr pda (talk) 01:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The problem is still happens, no matter what article. I will check for conflicting scripts. Gary King (talk) 01:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I removed all scripts except for this one, and the problem still occurs. Gary King (talk) 01:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

That's strange. It still works for me, and User:SandyGeorgia just left a message on my talk page to say it is working fine for her as well. I presume you refreshed your monobook.js after removing the other scripts, so I guess that wouldn't help. Do you get any output from the script at all? Are there any error messages in the javascript error console in your browser? Which browser are you using? Looking at the code there are two places where the script makes an XMLHttpRequest to load another page in the background; if this fails it generates the error message you are getting. The word "Forbidden" corresponds the HTTP 403 error. Maybe there's something up with your javascript settings (though if you were already using scripts successfully I wouldn't imagine so). I've tried expanding the error message to show the url of the page it can't load, and also added a missing second argument to one of the functions (which doesn't seem to have been affecting anything). Do you get anything different now? Dr pda (talk) 02:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm getting the 403 on "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=<span_class="editsection">[<a_href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Death_Cab_for_Cutie&action=edit&section=0"_title="Edit_lead_section">edit</a>]</span>Death_Cab_for_Cutie&fulltext=Search" (I decoded the URL - it is obviously not a URL, though, so no wonder it would give an error), for the Death Cab for Cutie article. The statistics still appear at the top of the article. The problem is because I have Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page enabled in my preferences. Could you please fix the script so it works with this option enabled? Gary King (talk) 02:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It works fine for me on that article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, but I've narrowed it down to that one preference. If you've got it enabled, then something else is wrong; otherwise, it's definitely that preference. It's disabled by default, so I will assume that most users of the script don't have it enabled. When I turned the preference off, the script worked without errors, also. Gary King (talk) 02:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

OK it should be fixed now. The reason for the error was that the script was taking the title of the article from within the first <h1> tag, i.e. the bold title at the start of the article. (I was using this rather than the url from the address bar to handle redirects properly). Apparently the edit-link gadget puts the html code for the edit link inside this h1 tag, so it was getting into the url used by the script. I've corrected this by using an already-defined global variable for the name of the page instead. Dr pda (talk) 02:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Perfect, no error Gary King (talk) 03:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Music samples

Noticed your comment at Talk:Death_Cab_for_Cutie#Furthermore - if you can get hold of Audacity, all you need to do is get an MP3 (or whatever), put it into Audacity, crop it to about 30 (relevant) seconds, and convert to Ogg format. Then upload, and you can use User:Giggy/Audio for a full summary of the file, etc. (Though you might want to make your own version using your name, etc.)

Hope this helps...cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 08:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I'll do that. I'm familiar with Audacity and such, but hate dealing with media files when I don't have to (that includes images, audio, and video); I'm a programmer, so text is my weapon of choice. That's a useful template; I've edited it per your request on the template. Gary King (talk) 16:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Japanese characters

A pet irritation of mine. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Article_guidelines#Japanese_characters_are_totally_inappropriate Tony (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I don't want to be involved in this. I guess I'm glad I brought attention to this, but it's not something I would like to worry about either way. Gary King (talk) 16:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Chewie

Hey Gary, don't, whatever you do, take it personally. You're in the right place at the wrong time. Two months ago you'd have been sitting pretty with, no doubt, 20 or 30 FL's to your name. Just because you have a bunch of FLCs out for review then yours will most likely attract attention. Stick with it. I think there's going to be a bit more pain before we all get used to the more stringent approach. It's good, in the long run. I promise! Drop me a line if you want to talk it over more. Best, The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess I chose the most cataclysmic time to be active on Wikipedia. I've encountered every major and stringent reviewer at FAC, FLC, and GAN already. When I review FACs that are a few months old, they have three supports and then they're out of there. Yikes! Gary King (talk) 16:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of anthems by country

If I were you, I'd request the FLC reopened. --Dweller (talk) 16:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe later; I've got a few more open that are going to fail first :) Gary King (talk) 16:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for assistance

Hello there. At the moment, I am working on the Unreal Tournament article (want to get it to GA, then FA). So far, I have added a "Reception" section, and a new System Requirements table. Bits of the new re-written article are lingering in my sandbox at User:Wackymacs/Sandbox2- None of the new Gameplay section has been implemented yet. My goal is to get rid of the weapons/game types/special features lists, and then convert those to prose. I would most appreciate it if you could collaborate with me on this. Thanks! — Wackymacs (talk) 16:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't play that game, so I most likely won't be very helpful. Also, it looks like that article certainly does need all the help it can get. Gary King (talk) 16:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

FAR

You might want to see this, as your Zelda FT will be sunk if it goes through. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:38, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I will take a look, although two of the articles in the topic are currently at FAC so the topic should be extra safe soon. Also, I just got Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare promoted to FA today. Gary King (talk) 01:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Good job on the FA. For the topic, if any component is not at GA or FA status, then it's grounds for the topic to be removed. That's why this is an issue, not necessarily falling under the FA minimum. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah right, it would drop down to B-class, I forgot. I'll get right on it. There are quite a few fires to put out for these topics. Gary King (talk) 01:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Scarborough, Ontario

Another editor has added some additional comments to the Scarborough, Ontario article. Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 00:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I will follow through with those notes. Gary King (talk) 01:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Bot handling of co-noms

Gary - You asked

By the way, how does your bot know if a co-nom is present or not in a nomination? For instance, would this be picked up?

WP:WBFAN, and now WP:WBFLN, are directly generated from a set of by-year lists, like WP:FA2008. Multiple noms are indicated in the by-year lists using "&", there have been plenty of these in 2008. The bot reads the contents of the by-year lists and regenerates the entire WBFAN page every day (from scratch) according to whatever the by-year lists say. Before regenerating WBFLN the bot automatically (with no supervision) generates new entries in the by-year list identifying the (single) user who created the nom file as the nominator (now ignoring GimmeBot), so multiple noms for FLs have to be manually edited into the by-year list. For WBFAN I run this task of the bot manually assisted - it proposes at most two nominators (from the first two links to user pages in the nom file) and I look at the nom file and either take the suggested noms or override the bot's choice. In the case you mention I would (probably) notice and override the bot's suggestion. If not, the fix is to simply edit the by-year list. The main point of the by-year lists is to provide the raw data in an easily machine parsable form (the nom files themselves are way too numerous and way too irregular). -- Rick Block (talk) 01:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, so there is still a lot of human intervention required. I gotcha now. Gary King (talk) 01:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Did you bother to look at the website link to Mistress Didi's site? Fetish Educator - the entire point is to lift the banal, uptight, irresponsible impression of fetish realities that cause extremely limited people to CENSOR knowledge from the masses - like you've done.

Learn something before you dare to pontificate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glamourdomme (talk • contribs) 05:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Please do not link to external sites for the sole reason of advertising it, especially in a disambiguation page. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 05:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Now, why didn't you just say that instead of accusing me of vandalizing? I forgive you because I understand that most people think ill of others because of what they would do themselves in the situation. I checked Mistress Didi's links and found a better page that is about education and not her events. That is the reason I placed her on the Didi page in the first place - to educate the limited masses. Now, I am going to add her site again and use the page that is about Classic Fetish to assist those who are not afraid to explore what life has to offer. Glamourdomme (talk) 05:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)GlamourDomme

Okay, but I should warn you that someone else will remove it, then. Gary King (talk) 05:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The situation was properly explained

Take a look at how well the situation was "dealt" with - a simple explanation without rude insinuations. Learn from that. Glamourdomme (talk) 06:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, but it still seems like the initial reason to add the link to the page was to advertise it. Gary King (talk) 06:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

See also punc

I've added to your comment - I don't want to revert the edit in case I've missed something. Give it a day or two. Good news is this template is only transcluded so if we remove the full stop, tens of thousands of articles will simply be fixed. In other words, don't panic! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I know; I just cringe whenever I see the full stop because I use {{see also}} a lot! Gary King (talk) 16:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Understood.. I guess, perhaps, the editor in question didn't really dig your simple link. Hopefully my expanded explanation should get the ball rolling. Eyes peeled... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah; I don't think you can deny that my writing skills have improved significantly over the past few weeks (starting with 2 failed FACs because I didn't know what the heck I was doing), and especially since I started editing massively (around February, but I was a member for 3 years but didn't care much for the community at that time.) I've reached the point where tiny full stops bother me. I can't help myself! Gah. Gary King (talk) 17:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Punctuation issue resolved. As for the template merger, well I guess TfD is the right place since one would be enhanced and the other deleted... Not the world's biggest template expert I'm afraid! The Rambling Man (talk) 06:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I'll be off-wiki for your birthday, so have a good one! The Rambling Man (talk) 07:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Punctuation

Template_talk:See_also#Punctuation Gary King (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I would agree with Gary, it's not a complete sentence so it doesn't need a full stop/period/whatever you want to call it. Per WP:MOS, "See also: X, Y and Z" is a nominal group and doesn't require the punctuation. Can you revert your own change, or, at least, discuss it first? I would imagine that template is used in tens of thousands of articles... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, my eyes missed this section altogether. I'm happy to undo my change, and have done so. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:40, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, thanks! Gary King (talk) 21:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Iron Man and images

Yeah, because we cannot actually say that something is "comprehensive" in the film market when we know that most DVDs contain lots of behind the scenes information. It's a major resource that shouldn't be ignored. As for images, I don't know what to suggest. The Friday the 13th franchise page has a single image and that's because it is truly relevant. We cannot have images on a page without the critical commentary to back them up. Where exactly are people suggesting the use of film images? The only differences between Halloween and F13 is that F13 has that image in the lead (which would be great to have for Halloween if Dimension would get off their asses and release a box set of the films, so that we could actually have an image that represents the whole series). Other than that, and the one image in the development section, the other major difference is the use of quote boxes. Quote boxes help to dress up a page, and we could probably use some more in the Halloween article, but that probably won't come till we expand it further.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Gary King (talk) 02:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Facebook group for Stefanie Rengel.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Facebook group for Stefanie Rengel.png. 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) 12:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Orange Box FT?

Have you thought about using the commentary tracks in each of the games (apart from HL2-proper) to add some development info? I could give you a hand if I'm not too busy. Sceptre ^(talk) 14:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm holding off on a Orange Box FT for now; I've got other articles to work on that I think I should build up first. Gary King (talk) 15:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Congrats on getting Coldplay's article to GA. ;) Do you think it might have a chance of passing as an FA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Not yet as it is now. It still needs more work. Gary King (talk) 19:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. What type of work, though? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure yet, I will take a second look later. I'm currently working on a few video game articles for FA. Gary King (talk) 19:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright and that's cool. If your not busy, can you give me some pointers on what Poison Ivy's, Batman villain, needs to have/do to be a GA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not too sure since I've never worked on a fictional biography, or a biography at all, actually. But, the lead seems a bit short, a few paragraphs are uncited, and a few references need to be formatted. Gary King (talk) 19:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been working on adding refs. and stuff. But, I'll try to see if I can expand the lead and stuff. Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

CoD 4

Congratulations on getting CoD 4 to FA status, a monumental task considering the state the article was in a few weeks ago. Watching the progress of the nomination has benefitted me as well, since I can look to CoD 4 as an example whenever I attempt to nominate another article I've been periodically working on. Good luck on any other articles you try to bring to FA! -- Comandante {Talk} 19:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm also using the article as a basis for other video game articles that I am working on. Gary King (talk) 19:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Template:Resolved comments

I changed it back because if it wasn't caps like the original way, it messed up the template on the pages it's already been used on. That test you did fixed it, though, so it's good now. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Sorry if the message I posted on your talk page seemed a bit biting. I read it afterwards and it seemed that way, but I had no intention of that. Gary King (talk) 00:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Birthday wishes

Hi Gary, happy birthday! I hope it's a good one. PeterSymonds | talk 04:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Although I don't want any of the responsibility that comes with the territory :( Gary King (talk) 04:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

RE:WP:RFPP

Actually I'm just about to get off. Painted my garage yesterday and today, I'm too tired for Wikipedia :) Oh yeah, Happy Birthday! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 06:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Anyways, User:Tiptoety is around, so he should be able to catch up :p Gary King (talk) 06:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah he's a good one, good luck! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 06:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

how to make quick cash for kids

you are considering deleting my frst wikipedia page because it looks like an essay and i can tell you that it is not and i would appreciate it if you didn't delete my page. Many thanks

Al4kber —Preceding unsigned comment added by Al4kber (talk • contribs) 07:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean to discourage your contributions to Wikipedia. The article was unfortunately deleted, though. Gary King (talk) 07:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Facebook

That's totally fine, it's not a great image to begin with, and I only uploaded it because I thought there was no image available (check Commons, mine is the only one in the Category). So not a big deal at all. Thanks for the heads up, VanTucky 07:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the heads up. I've added the category to it now. commons:Category:Facebook. Gary King (talk) 07:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Republigay

Hi Gary- How is the term "vandalism"? There is nothing pejorative about being gay. or a republican. But being called a vandal is. Please remove that characterization. And happy birthday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JD222 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC) --JD222 (talk) 16:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it is not supposed to be offensive, but the fact is the term is used in a manner meant to offend in many cases. I also said on your Talk page that it was not a constructive edit. Cheers! Gary King (talk) 16:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree; the same could be said of the term "liberal" -- that it is used negatively against those it describes -- which is why liberals now prefer the term "progressive." Nevertheless, that does not mean "liberal" is no longer a legitimate descriptor for a certain class of people. Thank you for removing the "vandal" charge. --JD222 (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, fair enough. Cheers. Gary King (talk) 18:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Happy Birthday mate, great work on your recent GAs and FLs. Sunderland06 (talk) 17:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 17:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, exceptional work. Have a great birthday, you deserve it. Qst (talk 18:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, thanks! Gary King (talk) 18:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

H.B.Unschool (talk) 20:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Economics

You seem to be right about WikiProject Economics being inactive. I'm completely new to the project, but I'm interested in taking an active role getting it back up and functional again. I like to think I know what I'm doing, but this is my first WikiProject. You seem to be rather active in the project, so if you see me doing anything wrong don't hesitate to let me know. I don't expect you to be a mentor or anything, but as someone who's worked with WikiProject Economics, you're much more experienced than I am. I'll invoke WP:BOLD to the best of my abilities. Thanks in advance, and happy birthday :). -FrankTobia (talk) 19:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. I've posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Economics#Inactive WikiProject; hopefully we can start a dialog that involves more participants in the project. Gary King (talk) 20:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy birthday. Hopefully we can spruce up some economics articles. Out of curiosity, what's your background in it? Also, I was glancing at your PHP contributions and I noticed that you tend to make dozens of small edits at the same time. Sorry to be blunt, but that's kind of a pet peeve of mine. It makes it harder to look through the history of the page and judge what you're doing when you spread edits out like that. Could you try to compress your edits, especially if we're going to be working together? ImperfectlyInformed | {talk - contribs} 21:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll do that. It's a habit of mine, and one that has been brought to my attention before. I don't have any professional education in economics other than a strong desire to learn more about it. I'm a computer scientist by training. Gary King (talk) 21:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: AWB

I have AWB, but I havn't found anything to use it for yet. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

And I can't really change the pages it's used on, as most of them are archived FACs and FLCs which shoulnd't be touched after being closed. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if that's possible. The closed FC nominations state: Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page. What if we left the current template as it is, and then started a new one with a slightly different name? Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that's easy enough. Also, that test you did gave everything your signature, so I don't know how to make it work correctly. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally, that would be the easiest way, but again, we still won't have the timestamp. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

WBFTN

Based on the current contents of the by-year lists (I've populated the 2006 and 2007 lists), the bot would make the table at WP:WBFTN look like this:

Hurricanehink	★	★	★	★	★
Gary King	★	★	★
Igordebraga	★	★	★
Sephiroth BCR	★	★	★
Tree Biting Conspiracy	★	★	★
Deckiller	★	★
Dihydrogen Monoxide	★	★
Scorpion0422	★	★
The Rambling Man	★	★
17Drew	★
Acdixon	★
Awadewit	★
ChrisTheDude	★
Collectonian	★
David Fuchs	★
FutureNJGov	★
HansHermans	★
HiB2Bornot2B	★
Indianescence	★
Jackyd101	★
Judgesurreal777	★
LuciferMorgan	★
Matthewedwards	★
Mattythewhite	★
Maxim	★
Pericles of Athens	★
Phoenix2	★
Saravask	★
Sgeureka	★
Teemu08	★
Thedemonhog	★
Tompw	★
Woody	★
Zscout370	★

I'll get approval for the bot to update both WBFTN and the by-year list - and I'll change "nomination" to "promotion". -- Rick Block (talk) 22:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC) -- Rick Block (talk) 22:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars Episodes appears twice for me. Gary King (talk) 03:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The October 2006 log file linked to your 2008 nom rather than tbc's nom. If there are any other topics that have been de-featured and renomed that you can think of you might want to check those as well. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

From memory I think that's the only topic that was renominated. Gary King (talk) 03:52, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

COOKIE MONSTeR

Fattyjwoods ^{(Push my button)} has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hi, just to make sure you're not hungry - keep up the good work! Fattyjwoods ^{(Push my button)} 01:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I like cookies. They are yummy. Gary King (talk) 03:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTM

Congratulations on your recent WP:FL. In case you do not know, we are running an experiment to choose the List of the Month and Lists of the Day for June. Feel free to nominate your list at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Nominees/200807 for consideration next month to be the July LOTM or a LOTD. If you would like to support this experiment the most important thing you can do is come by and vote at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/voting/200806. My talk page is always open.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Review

Eek, my big mistake then. From the RfA:

"He then starts running an unauthorized bot to do categorization automatically even though just about every page regarding categorization states unequivocally that bots should never be used for categorization (and of course, simple common sense would dictate that automatic categorization of uncategorized pages is a recipe for disaster). Unsurprisingly, disaster follows. He is told to stop [7] many times [8] and denies using a bot [9], which actually requires quite a bit of gall given that he was categorizing uncategorized articles at a rate of around 6 a minute [10]. Despite the warnings, he actually continued until this was taken to ANI where he again denied that this was a bot and defended his work, rather than say plainly: I goofed real bad [11]. He did run another bot (just as unauthorized, but hey, at that stage we're probably past caring) to undo the categorization."

I'm sorry. I misread "I goofed real bad" as something that you had said, and not a phrase that was never said. :( PeterSymonds | talk 06:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, but again, it was really painful when I was reading your review (which was very glowing) and then came upon that — as the last item, no less. If it makes anyone feel better, I would be happy to deliver the code I used for that incident, but personally, I wish I could put that behind me. If you check my history on Wikipedia, I did nothing productive until after that event; I would consider the promotion of my first Featured list to be the real beginning of my Wikipedia career. Gary King (talk) 06:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I know, and I'm truly sorry; I feel terrible about it. I've struck the comments; as you say, they weren't even true. My suggestion is that you note your Wiki beginnings at your first FL in your next nomination, in case that incident garners opposes as it did last time. A solid history of non-automated actions is clear, so I shouldn't think you have too much to worry about. Anyway, very, very sorry again. PeterSymonds | talk 06:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that incident had too many opposes on the last RFA, but I will mention something along the lines that I was really interested in contributing to Wikipedia after that first FLC; the biggest issue was brought up by Pedro, who mentioned that I made submissions too quickly to AIV, and I completely agree. I'd like to also mention that everyone at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of autonomous areas by country were really friendly to me at my first FLC and I have ended up being familiar with those users — you were the first person to ever criticize my work on Wikipedia! (I just realized that I had a bunch of unsuccessful nominations before then... but still. It was a very fun FLC!) Before that FLC, if you check my contributions, the vast majority of them were adding categories to articles because I didn't know what other way I could help contribute to Wikipedia and I was completely oblivious to the fact that there was a lot of things going on that were deeper than the very top layer. Gary King (talk) 06:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Tehe, well, it's certainly nothing personal; I've had more friendly dealings with you than anyone here. I consider all criticism to be constructive and in the best interests of both Wikipedia and the editor. So when I get it wrong on such a large scale (by only misreading a sentence; didn't realise how easy it was!) then I naturally feel guilty. I hope there are no hard feelings. Best, PeterSymonds | talk 06:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

No, no! I didn't mean to make you feel bad from my last comment; I was just saying that I still seem to keep in contact with a lot of people from my first FLC, especially even after branching off to FAC and GA and all that :) Gary King (talk) 06:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Yes, haha, I was thinking that when I bump into you in completely unrelated places! But with over 30 000 edits I'm hardly surprised!! ;) PeterSymonds | talk 06:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

review (2)

Thanks for your note. I'll give it a try. It'll be a while though.14:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlohcierekim (talk • contribs)

Alright, no problem. Please take your time, I don't want a rushed review. Gary King (talk) 04:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Half-Life 2: Episode One

I think the time has come for another run at FAC. However, as an experienced editor on that particular article, I was wondering if you think its ready for another go? Your edits have brought the article to a far higher standard than it was at the last FAC. Qjuad (talk) 23:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, we can have another go at it. Gary King (talk) 23:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Lets give it a whirl. Qjuad (talk) 23:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

If you submit it, I will co-nom it. Gary King (talk) 23:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Dead Link Checker error

I got this error when I hit 'Save changes':

<class 'wikipedia.NoPage'>: No textarea found
      args = ('No textarea found',)
      message = 'No textarea found' 

Gary King (talk) 01:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

 Fixed Just me being stupid with javascript matching and not testing :-(. Quite a few changes to the JavaScript layer today. Still not as automated as I want, but its getting there. The cool new thing (as I always announce on this page for some reason) is integration with the reflinks.py script, so no longer do I have to merge the output of two scripts. But I'll have to talk to User:NicDumZ to add some feature to his script. — Dispenser 02:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Any chance it can be fixed? I've got a few articles that are in desperate need of it. Gary King (talk) 02:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, if I didn't make that clear. You may need to clear the browser cache (Crtl-Shift-R on the Toolsever page) — Dispenser 02:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it works great again. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 04:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Episode One and such

Seriously, how do you put up with me? :) --Laser brain (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

One day, I will write articles so well that it will put you out of business! That's my goal, anyways :D Gary King (talk) 04:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Nebraska Section

Nebraska is part of Archbald. East Jermyn is referred to as the lane which includes Nebraska I suppose. Ch8ch (talk) 04:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I think I applied that tag incorrectly. This incident happened nearly three months ago, but still, sorry if I did misapply it. Gary King (talk) 04:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Scarborough

OK, I've done some more work on Scarborough, Ontario. I added new sections on Education and Governance and added new subsections to Geography and Infrastructure. I've also done some work on History although this needs further work (I need to visit the library tomorrow). I've also revised some of the wording in Arts and Culture. I haven't addressed all the concerns of Dr. Cash (talk) but I think I'm closing in.

If you have some time perhaps you could do some proofreading (don't worry about the ref formats, I plan to harmonize those later). EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 23:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It looks great. I will go through it and see what I can do to improve it. I don't mind formatting the references because unformatted reference are a pet peeve of mine, and it doesn't take me long to format them. I'll probably learn a few things after reading it, too. Great job! Gary King (talk) 23:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The Fenco MacLaren reference is a consultant's [16] report commissioned by the TRCA. I don't know what template to use. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 00:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

You misconstrued my comment. The reference refers to the report, not the company. I only provided a link for your own use to prove that it came from a reliable source. The report itself is not online. I used the cite book template as that seems to be the closest thing. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 04:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, my apologies. Thanks for fixing it. Gary King (talk) 04:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

What's the difference between a good article and a featured article? EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 11:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Generally speaking, a Good Article requires only one reviewer to pass it; a Featured Article requires consensus among several reviewers to pass it. It is more difficult to pass. Gary King (talk) 14:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to say hai

Tinucherian has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend or a possibly new friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Have a great day ! -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 10:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 14:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Canada Day

That is a good idea. I don't know how much time I'll have but I will certainly put some effort in. Cheers! DoubleBlue (Talk) 16:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I will start working on it later on today then. Please put the page on your watchlist. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 16:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Input at Wikipedia:WikiProject Economics/Featured Article drive

Thanks for notification, but I've already voted. Of course, if some other article is selected for FA drive, I will still do what I can to improve it. -- Vision Thing -- 21:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:AIV

Yep, you can, and I'm sure a lot of administrators (including me :p) would be quite happy if you did do that. You can also leave comments using {{AIV}}, which gives a nice heads up to whatever administrator is going over the page. I would leave comments most of the time, and the only cases I would remove would be a stale report (one hour plus, around an hour for IPs, a bit longer for useres) or absolutely no recent warnings. In all though, clerking there would be a very helpful task you could get involved in. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Gary, I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk 23:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Oops! I was making extra sure I tried not to do that...! I've corrected it; hopefully they won't notice... Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 07:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Detroit Red Wings head coaches

 Done « Milk's Favorite Cookie ^{( talk / contribs)} 00:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry - done. « Milk's Favorite Cookie ^{( talk / contribs)} 00:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Once more. (Done) « Milk's Favorite Cookie ^{( talk / contribs)} 01:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Nishkid took care of the List of New England Patriots head coaches comments. « Milk's Favorite Cookie ^{( talk / contribs)} 01:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Review

I've taken the liberty of adding some questions. Cheers, Dlohcierekim's sock (talk) 04:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I will take a look at them! Gary King (talk) 06:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Episode: One

Thanks for the note. It wasn't my intention to leave you hanging with the nom - unfortunately, as with last time, all the free time I thought I'd have available has been taken away by a number of issues, but I intend to give the article a seeing to this week. Thanks for your help! Qjuad (talk) 09:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Flooding of Guitar Hero 3: Legends of Rock history

If you take a look at the History page for Guitar Hero III. Most of the edits were found by you in large numberts, you need to break down several edits and make them giant edits,, not several and you need to hit the preview button (next to the "save page" button) if you're not sure what edit will take effect of what you did and see how it looks. Keep in mind not to flood by continous minor edits and to make bigger edits next time if you are going to contribe that widely...thankyou.... YaBoiKrakerz

Fair enough, although I was working on formatting references during those edits so I wanted to see how they looked in the references section; previewing would not work when only working in a section. Gary King (talk) 00:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually previewing does work in a section,, I would also like to say that I noticed you linked the word "Activision" several times Wikipedia only needs a word that is to be linked to another article only once, when the word comes up again and again, it is to be left alone. YaBoiKrakerz

I mean, when I preview a section, I can't see how the references look when formatted. If you are talking about "Activision" in the article's body, it is only linked twice or three times, I believe. Gary King (talk) 00:50, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

It only needs to be linked once and only once throughout the rest of the article. YaBoiKrakerz

Feel free to unlink the ones that should be linked, then. I don't think this is such a major issue. Also, if it is linked in the lead, it should still be linked at least once in the body. There is no hard-and-fast rule as to how many times you should link it; just don't overlink it, but if you are using it in fair amounts in two sections that are far from each other on the page, I see no reason why you couldn't link it once in each section. I have done it before, and suggestions have also been given in FACs to follow this practice when it is a convenience for readers. Gary King (talk) 00:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not a big issue, it's just what Wikipedia does, frankly I think it's stupid, LOL. YaBoiKrakerz

Yeah, it's important to balance overlinking with not linking enough for convenience. Gary King (talk) 20:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

EconProject FA

Yea, oops. I should have RTFM first, but I tried to undo my vote. I think everyone made the right choice :) Bsdlite (talk) 20:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Scarborough

Gary,

nice job with the Scarborough article. I think you have added immeasurably to the professionalism. However the crime story with Scarborough is as most of us know out of whack with reality.

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/publications/files/reports/2006statsreport.pdf

here is a link for the official police stats. Homicides in Scarborough is 27% of the total, Scarborough is nearly 27% of the population. The land area is north of 30% of the city. Much of the crime bashing is based on the culture of reporting, which until very recently, led off with 'shooting in Scarborough' . The media now referecnes intersections for Scarborough now.

Those of us who live here understand Scarborugh is not utopia. But by no stretch is it much differnt than the rest of the city.

If using the 2007 stats, there were I believe three domestic situations involving mutltiple homicides. As well the referenced 35 number is wrong. You should check the star website, or wait for the police referencing to come out.

Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idyllic (talk • contribs)

Alright thanks, I will take a look. Gary King (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Scarborough (2)

I've updated some information to prove my point about using one year.

Unfortunately i'm a dinosaur when it comes to footnoting the reference. Pleae bear with me, i will attempt to learn to do this in the next day.

thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idyllic (talk • contribs) 21:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

one other item...

please pass on my regards to encyclopediawhatis (the dude editing Scarborough)...outstanding job by both of you. This article has gone from amateur hour to a very good read. Congratulations to you both. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idyllic (talk • contribs) 21:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I have formatted the references you added. Also, you should probably talk to EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk · contribs) for future collaboration on the article because he is more involved with the article than I am right now. Gary King (talk) 21:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Good job!

Theiluvcookiemunster (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you for what you have done here at Wikipedia!

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 15:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Crash Bandicoot topic

In response to your statement over me making a Crash Bandicoot featured topic, I'd like to say I never had any intention of creating the topic just yet. I am perfectly aware of the rules for such action, so I probably should've reworded my peer review request better. Sorry for the inconvenience. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 00:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about. I am talking about your addition of an article to the Zelda FT. Gary King (talk) 00:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh. That. Uh, sorry about that. I was thinking about something else. Never mind. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

List of navigational stars

Gary, you had originally opposed the FLC nomination of Navigational stars due to issues with the lead prose that you pointed out in Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Navigational_stars. I have now made all the requested changes and was wondering if you could please give it another quick review? Thanks! I'm also presently working together with User:Haus to add 2 more graphical star charts to make the article even more useful. Alexander Falk (talk) 03:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay I will take a look. Gary King (talk) 03:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Laser

Semi'd for 2 days. And also, being linked to by Google really isn't a rationale for protection. Pretty much every article here is so. bibliomaniac15 03:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Uh, the article is linked to from Google's logo, not a search term or anything like that. Gary King (talk) 03:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not working for me... bibliomaniac15 03:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Logo is at here. It's today's logo. Gary King (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

When I go to the Google home page, it's just the traditional Google logo and the search box. bibliomaniac15 03:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Unlucky you then :p Gary King (talk) 03:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU

Sure, I can add you to the Eastern Time zone. I'll get that done in a couple of minutes. And the status thing updates itself. It took me a while to figure out a way to have the status update via SoxBot V (which just recently got approved), but I finally got it. You don't have to worry about a thing. Useight (talk) 04:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I suppose it could be thought of like that. The bot checks if you've made an edit within the last 15 minutes and if so, ensures that your status is "online." You don't have to be on the list if you don't want. Useight (talk) 04:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Please also add checkmarks for the areas in which you are most comfortable and experienced. Useight (talk) 04:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

editing

Gary,

how do I add footnotes when adding a link? Instead of just having the link at the end of the notation, see Crime in the Scarborough page.

I would like to start adding more meaningful contribution as per outstanding issues needed to flesh the article out.

Any direction to help me would be greatly appreciated.

Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idyllic (talk • contribs) 12:16, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Everything you need to know can be found at WP:CIT. You can also take a look at other footnotes and copy and paste them, but be sure to remove the values that are already there. Gary King (talk) 14:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

FA

Hey, do you want to try and get Uma Thurman's article to FA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Damn, you certainly are jumping all over the place with regards to FAs! Uma is a better-than-average actress, but not one of my favorites, so I'll probably pass on that one. Gary King (talk) 00:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, unlike you, I don't have an FA to my resumé, just GA's and an FL. But, that's cool, I understand. I did, however, nominate Brad Pitt's article for GA and if it passes, hopefully, would you like to get that one to FA or do despise him too? ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:47, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, you're right that I've got an FA or too, but they also made me realize how much work is required to do that. That's why I'm limiting the number of articles that I work on simultaneously to FA, and that's basically why I only work on things that really interest me now. The only film I like with Uma Thurman is Pulp Fiction. Brad Pitt is okay, but not one of my favorites, also. If I were to work on an actor's article, it would probably be Christian Bale (I love Batman Begins and The Dark Knight looks amazing). Gary King (talk) 00:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, I understand. OMG, what a coincidence, I also happen to like Batman and Christian Bale, but I'll leave that for you to do. And, I know its late, but Happy Late B-Day. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 00:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

BOO!!!

Have a nice day. . --Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 03:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Uh. Okay :O Gary King (talk) 03:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry im in a good mood lol. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 03:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah okay, I'm happy for you then :p Now I'm in a good mood. It's all your fault! >:| Gary King (talk) 03:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Philadelphia Eagles head coaches

 Done with all your comments here. Thanks, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie ^{( talk / contribs)} 18:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah...

Hope I didn't harass you with those rampant Guitar Hero III clean-up complaints, to tell you the truth, I think your edits are good. YaBoiKrakerz

No problem Gary King (talk) 23:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Question about Edit

I saw on other pages that were linked by google, that they added in the "High Traffic Option", curious why you deleted it. (Nevermind, just saw you moved it) Danbopes (talk) 05:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about. I added a conditional to the template that should do something that does not affect pages that are already transcluding the template. Gary King (talk) 05:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Please consider using the "Show preview" button

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edit(s) to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. 46 edits in a row All the best, Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I do; in fact, a lot of the edits are not minor by any means at all. It's just that no one has edited within the period that I did, so it looks like one big stream of edits :) I do take breaks, though! Gary King (talk) 19:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Free images

Yes, basically there is obviously more latitude on using free images in an article. If, however, you are looking at an article going for FAC, then my rule of thumb is always to look at images as if they are non-free, i.e. are they actually improving the reader's understanding of the article, or are they merely there to make it look nice. You're unlikely to get an oppose at FAC unless you're wildly overusing free images, but to be honest too many images in an article can degrade it as much as underuse, because they distract the reader from the important part, which is the text itself. Black Kite 17:51, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, that's what I figured. I'm working on a few historical biographies so this is what I've been basing my reasoning on. Thanks. Gary King (talk) 19:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Directors

I got a good one. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Templates

It might have been considerate to ask me if I wanted to use harvard referencing templates since I'm the one working on the article, don't you think? --Laser brain (talk) 14:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I'm acting on WP:BOLD. Feel free to revert it. Gary King (talk) 15:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTM

List of countries without armed forces has been elected WP:LOTM for the month of June. It will also be listed as List of the Day twice during the month. Let me know if you have any days which are more preferable for it to be the LOTD.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

TFA reform

Hi, I’ve just made a comment on possible reform of the TFA system on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article. Since you seem to be engaged in this issue I’d appreciate if you had a look and perhaps weighed in. Cheers! Lampman ^{Talk to me!} 16:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Halloween

I saw. Good, it's good to finally get some criticism. Sorry if it takes me longer to respond to messages, but I'm working full time and doing a full time internship on top of that, so my time at home is limited.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Paying

Sorry I have not responded for a long time, I'm looking to pay someone because I'm not having any luck posting on the site. If you are interested, please email me at msiegel@marketforceinfo.com. I could really use some help. Thanks, Megan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bella1233 (talk • contribs)

I don't understand. Gary King (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

She's trying to get an article on her own company put on Wikipedia and it keeps getting deleted as spam. :) --Laser brain (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh okay, in that case, I am honored to be one of the few who were chosen to take on this task. I've got a pretty high minimum quote, though... Gary King (talk) 20:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Question about References

GK, Why the UPPER CASE ON THE REFERENCES? I personally don't like, find it annoying and harder on my old eyes to read. There is also nothing about it in Wikipedia:Citing sources. Why do it? ~ WikiDon (talk) 05:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I sometimes copy and paste the titles from the websites, and they are inconveniently in uppercase. Feel free to lowercase them. Gary King (talk) 14:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU

Sorry to bother you about this again, but you have yet to update your information at Highly Active Users. If you do not update your entry, it will be removed within 48 hours. Thanks. Useight (talk) 16:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I have updated my entry and have added myself to the 'content' column. Gary King (talk) 01:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Dead Link Checker error

What's the timeout time for connections? It seems to be longer than usual for some reason. I feel like it's around 10 seconds? Gary King (talk) 18:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Its suppose to be 30 seconds, it may seem longer now that I've add a 0.5 second delay between each link. On the Firefox 3 search you should be able to get to the tool by typing checklink or to the collection by typing linkchecker. — Dispenser 21:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

30 seconds is quite a long time, in my opinion. If a website takes that long to load, then clearly something is wrong; but anyways, it seems to be working fine for me again. I was recently working on articles with 200 or more links, so the tool was really slow at one point. Gary King (talk) 01:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

If you have the time, comments at the peer review for List of Naruto characters would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I will take a look, but I am not really familiar with the subject matter. Gary King (talk) 02:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Toronto

Cool =) I've seen you around as well. Which part of Toronto? I'm in the Mississauga area. Thanks for the well-wishes. xenocidic (talk) 02:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on that! From what I've seen, bringing a VG to FA can be quite difficult. Kudos! xenocidic (talk) 04:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! It was quite a challenge, but it is my favorite video game, so I was up for it. Gary King (talk) 02:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates

Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith for the guidelines on this. I will not be watching your talk page. GreenJoe 18:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I was assuming good faith; I was simply bringing to light something that others might not be aware of. Others, from the linked discussion, are clearly amused by some strange behavior. Gary King (talk) 02:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Peter Wall

Hi. I've responded to your comments at FAC. I wikilinked the accessdates, though that was reverted, and then unreverted. I should say that personally I feel unfussed either way, though I'm sure that one day I could be educated as to how such links are useful. If you had any further comments, I'd be most grateful. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 08:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The FA-Team

Hi. There has been some discussion of how to improve the FA-Team's functioning. It's be grand if you could comment on the new suggested structure, and perhaps also look at our current proposals. Thanks. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

FA Economics Drive

Gary - I appreciate your pointers. I have been placing the full text in my edit summaries, because of my reading in WP:ES that "In the case of a small addition to an article, it is highly recommended to copy the full text of this addition to the summary field, giving a maximum of information with a minimum of effort." Since I've been mostly re-editing my own additions in one section, I took this to be appropriate. I agree that more detailed summaries would be helpful and I'll work on providing that from here on out. MP (talk) 15:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that sounds good. I appreciate your reasoning; one thing I would suggest, though, is that you use quotes around your edit summaries when they are the actual text that you are adding; this clarifies that it is text in the actual edit rather than an explanation of the change you are making. Gary King (talk) 17:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Noble gas

Err.. Cliffs Notes? And Encyclopedia Britannica? While they probably aren't incorrect, surely there could be better more scholarly sources. And http://www.boc.ebcnet.co.uk/index.html is directed at chemisty teachers, right? Nothing screams at me as "unreliable" but nothing is greatly screaming "scholarly" either. Surely at least a college level textbook could have been used? Ealdgyth - Talk 00:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The "Noble Gas Geochemistry" is a college-level textbook and is used quite a few times in the article. There are also at least a few articles from related journals, including Science (magazine) and Physical Review. Gary King (talk) 00:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not a chemistry person (grins). I do think the cliff notes, EB and the teacher website, although acceptable, might be bettered. You asked my opinion, knowing I have a bias for scholarly sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

FLC: Discoveries of the chemical elements

I thought it needed a bit more info in the notes in the second half of the list, and I believe it also needs a colored periodic table according to the year of discovery. The problem is that I don't really have time these days to do this, and I could not find anybody else interested to help. :( Nergaal (talk) 19:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, great start anyways. I sincerely hope to see it as an FL one day, as it is obvious that you have put a lot of work in it and I think it is an important list. Gary King (talk) 19:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre

I did a little bit of cleanup in the article. Could you tell me what you think? Thanks, --EclipseSSD (talk) 19:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks good, but prose issues still exist in the article. There is no need to rush the article to FAC; prose needs to be massaged over time. I suggest asking a copyeditor to take a look at the article. Issues include:

• "psychopaths.One" — Missing a space
• "hitch hiker" and "hitchhiker" — both are used; be consistent and pick one

These are just samples. Gary King (talk) 19:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Facebook

Thanks Gary for the comments regarding the Facebook article, but in this case I wasn't adding any punctuation marks, but simply following the American Standard for Quotation marks:

Punctuation: The traditional convention in American English is for commas and periods to be included inside the quotation marks, regardless of whether they are part of the quoted sentence, while the British style places them in or outside of the quotation marks according to whether or not the punctuation is part of the quoted phrase. The American rule is derived from typesetting while the British rule is grammatical. Alissa98cp (talk) 03:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:PUNC Gary King (talk) 03:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Touché Alissa98cp (talk) 03:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

:) Policy is always useful; regardless of if I agree with it or not, I still try to abide by it. Gary King (talk) 03:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Metroid Prime 3 - Corruption - phazon.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Metroid Prime 3 - Corruption - phazon.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) 09:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Adolf Hitler at Berchtesgaden.ogg

Hi there. I notice you removed this video from the article on Hitler and instead inserted a link to the file. WP's policies on fair use require images or videos to actually be physically included in articles - if they're simply linked to, it's not treated as being fair use, and the video will be deleted (it's tagged to be deleted next Monday). I don't personally have any views on whether the video belongs in the article or not - I uploaded it for procedural reasons after it was deleted on Commons - but I thought I'd let you know in case you wanted to do something with it. If the problem was that the video dominated the page because of its size, you can use [[Image:Adolf Hitler at Berchtesgaden.ogg|thumb|thumbtime=3|Video of Adolf Hitler at Berchtesgaden]] to produce a thumbnail of more normal size. Regards, -- Arvind (talk) 13:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I wasn't aware that I could do this. I've re-added the video as a thumbnail. Gary King (talk) 16:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

GA review

Hi, just a quick question. I noticed that you added the review template to a GAN, and then passed it five minutes later. Did you really fully read and review Kingston upon Hull in five minutes? I noticed some prose issues in the article, so I'm just checking. Cheers, Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 19:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I intended on placing the 'On hold' icon instead of the review one; I copy and pasted what was in the instructions and thought it would be the On Hold icon. I noticed a few minor prose issues, but nothing that I thought should prevent it from GA. If the article were to go through FAC, however, then I would certainly bring those up; but generally, the article looks a lot better than many current GAs so I figure I would pass it. Gary King (talk) 20:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, ok, that should be fine then. Thanks for clearing that up. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

While the article is still reasonably well written and well cited, there are numerous issues with it meeting the GA criteria. There's lots of short sections, lots of information missing (demographics and economy were jokes, no offense). There's also lots of organizational issues, and even WP:NPOV issues. I have delisted the article and referred back to WP:GAN. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, fair enough. Gary King (talk) 00:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

colon

Thanks, Gary. Tony (talk) 02:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Gary King (talk) 14:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Using bot to remove alumni tag?

I noticed that you, using a bot, removed the page about me from the "University of Waterloo Alumni" category. Not sure what reason there would be for doing that, but since I refrain from editing the page about me, I thought I would ask rather than revert.--Bradtem (talk) 07:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I removed the category (manually, not automated) because there was no mention of the school in the article. I have since gone out and looked for a page that mentions that you attended the school; I found this, so I will use it, although it is published by yourself. If you can provide a reference that mentions you graduated from Waterloo and is published by a third-party, reliable source, then please provide it. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 14:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

GAN:Noble gas

I have heavily edited the article myself. I have left out a todo list on the talk page with everything else that it needs to be added for a FA. Nergaal (talk) 07:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I will look it over. Please add references to information that you add to the article, because frankly, it is more difficult (at least, for me) to find references for scientific topics. Gary King (talk) 14:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

TCM

Leaving aside the pros issues (I've added a request on LOCE), I've updated The Texas Chain Saw Massacre to include its sequels, as well as various other updates. What do you think now? --EclipseSSD (talk) 13:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks better, although I don't know if a Sequels section is required. If you look at other film articles that have sequels, I don't think they mention their sequels (in detail), beyond stating that they have a sequel. LOCE is a not very effective; you need to actively contact participants of the project and ask for a copyedit. Gary King (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

autodud

OK, entree is here. But there are yet more compelling reasons in later discussions. I'll find them for you. Tony (talk) 17:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

From what I understand, you don't like that dates are linked because they add nothing of value. I agree. But, I also think that dates should be autoformatted based on user preference. If an article has all the dates unlinked but formatted the same way, then that would be more acceptable, but I would still prefer all the dates to be formatted according to my own preferences. Gary King (talk) 17:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU

Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users, SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 17:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/PowerBook 100

Are all the issues you listed now resolved? Please cap or strike as necessary. Thanks for your help! — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 21:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/New York State Route 28

I fixed or explained those issues. Can you take another look? Thanks, Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Same for NY 32 if possible.^Mitch32^contribs 00:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay done, although I only gave you one point. Is it really bothering your FAC that much? :p Gary King (talk) 01:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Improving Nintendo 64 to Featured Article status

The cartridges section used to be a bullet point list, while clearer to read, the new paragraph format is more in line with proper wiki style. I'm still finding it tough to get sources for the pros and cons for cartridges, it might be common sense to gamers but not other readers.

Again, congrats on Call of Duty 4, a GOTY is also a FA! GoldDragon (talk) 03:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, I posted this message to your talk page over two months ago. The article hasn't changed much since then, unfortunately. Gary King (talk) 05:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Dunder Mifflin GA hold

Which references need the additional info? Just the ones to the faux-Dunder Mifflin website? Daniel Case (talk) 07:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

All of the ones that are citing websites; it would be preferable if {{cite web}} was used. Gary King (talk) 14:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, another editor and myself took care of the remaining ones that I could find. Daniel Case (talk) 17:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I have responded to the changes at Talk:Dunder Mifflin/GA1. Please continue the conversation there to keep it all in one place, thanks! Gary King (talk) 17:21, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: revert

No prob. Whenever I see someone vandalize a page in someone's userspace I'm like "go, go, go, go... YES!!!! I got it!!!!", if you know what I mean... J.delanoy^gabsanalyze 20:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Haha, yep I know what you mean. Keep up the great work! Gary King (talk) 20:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Marilli

Stop replacing unsourced material in his entry. Please review Wikipedia's standards before adding unsourced material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.245.144.250 (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Please state in your edit summary that you are removing unsourced material when you remove several sections of content from an article. Gary King (talk) 20:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Nice Job!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Are you using a tool? Because I am, and you keep beating me to reverts! Shapiros10 WuzHere  20:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I am half man, half machine. I think you can call me a manchine ;) Gary King (talk) 20:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Whatever you call yourself, you should be happy you're doing so well. BTW, sign my guestbook! User:Shapiros10/Guestbook! Shapiros10 WuzHere  20:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Grrrr! You did it again! Shapiros10 WuzHere  20:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Haha, yeah I'm usually quick on the draw :p Maybe I will take a quick break to let you get some :) Gary King (talk) 20:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

S'okay. My mom's hounding me to get off. TTYL :D! Shapiros10 WuzHere  20:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright! Gary King (talk) 20:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

mother fucker edit

I didnt lie. I live in austin and right down the road from a bunch of mother fuckers. 21st street co-op is the definition of the word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.216.137 (talk • contribs)

Okay then. Gary King (talk) 03:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:Watchlist

I don't think so. I can see what pages aren't being watchlisted, but I'm unaware of any abilities beyond that. On a side note, I keep on seeing you in policy discussions, so you're moving nicely towards that next RfA, no? :p Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

What policy discussions? Either I'm unaware, or I am involving myself in things that simply interest me and so I accidentally come upon some discussions :D Gary King (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Eh. Must be because I look at WT:FLC and WT:FAC so often. And "policy discussions" was probably the wrong phrase to use. That said, you ultimately are moving in the right direction though. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Yep... I'm here for the long haul. Also, it's like taking free English lessons from some of the toughest teachers, over at WP:FAC. Yay! (D'oh!) Gary King (talk) 07:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Montana class battleship

Before I screw something up how many instances of absent dashes can you find? I'm asking becuase the standard operating procedure for most measurements to use nonbreaking spaces, so I want to where exactly the dashes need to go in the article before I create a cross style mess that requires alot of undo work. (Indientally, thanks for commenting, I am getting concerned here becuase I usually have more supporters for my FACs by now, so added comments are a welcome relief.) TomStar81 (Talk) 09:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I found a few that are mostly date ranges. Also, please link me to the FAC next time :) Thanks! Gary King (talk) 15:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought I left a link. That was m'bad :-\ Thanks for the reply, I didn't want to dig in until I sorted that point out. PS: here is the link. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Boston Red Sox captains

I have addressed your comments posted at the review. RedThunder 09:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, capped. Gary King (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

aah

You keep beating me to reverting the vandals! Dave the Rave 16:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry :) Gary King (talk) 16:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

nah, I'm new Dave the Rave 16:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratulations, your user page has been the victim of My First Deletion™ (I restored it, without the sensitive information). Take a look at make sure everything is in order. Cheers, xenocidic (talk) 17:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess you submitted a request for oversight? Gary King (talk) 17:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Is it actually your phone number? I figured it was just some random phone number. xenocidic (talk) 17:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It was a random number. Gary King (talk) 17:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think oversight is necessary in this case then, but I'll seek a second opinion. xenocidic (talk) 17:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

If you didn't go through oversight, then how did you remove a diff? I thought that's what oversight was for. Gary King (talk) 17:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete page, restore everything except the offending revision. (See Wikipedia:New admin school/Deleting#Restoring selected revisions). From what I understand oversight is only necessary in extreme cases. cheers, xenocidic (talk) 17:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello.

ermm who are you? x —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.126.68 (talk) 17:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

A manchine. Gary King (talk) 17:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

My edit wasn't nonconstructive.....

I believe that having an empty "References" section is nonconstructive. Therefore, I removed it. Anyone can add References, in which case I would not remove the section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.70.223.225 (talk) 20:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no reason to remove a References section even when it is empty. Leave it there. Gary King (talk) 20:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Awesome Job!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Wow! You keep on beating me! Good job and keep it up! Aremith tlk | eml 20:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 20:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Aremith's not the only one being beaten... RedThunder 20:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. Sorry about all the edit conflicts and such! :p Gary King (talk) 20:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. I was looking for something like that. I'd give you a barnstar, but you've already exceeded your daily limit! ;> xenocidic (talk) 21:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Aw, you can never receive too many barnstars! :p Gary King (talk) 21:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		For helping out this newbie admin figure out how to efficiently do my work on AIV! ;> xenocidic (talk) 21:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Haha, cheers! :D Gary King (talk) 21:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emmy Noether

Gary, I believe we've addressed all of the concerns you raised at the FAC for Emmy Noether. When you have a minute, perhaps you'd like to have a look? Thanks. – Scartol • Tok 22:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Capped Gary King (talk) 23:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Diego Velázquez

(ec x2, this is annoying) I have semi-protected it for 24 hours per the excessive recent IP vandalism. By the way, which method did you use to find that I was online? Useight (talk) 01:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

My telepathy powers usually serve me well, but this time, I used Recent Changes and I recognized your username. Oh, and my talk page is getting vandalized now after reverting vandalism from that article :) Gary King (talk) 01:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that. If it happens more than once or twice, I can issue a short block if necessary. Especially if personal attacks keep popping up. Useight (talk) 01:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Heh, check the last few messages on my talk... Gary King (talk) 01:21, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Your comment below about pulling a quarter from behind his ear made me laugh out loud. Useight (talk) 01:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

What's so funny with that? I ain't let you pull a quarter? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.95.195.187 (talk • contribs)

Ah, good times... Gary King (talk) 01:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

No harm!

No harm at all. You can always revert and revert! tell me then, maybe I might prompt you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.95.195.187 (talk) 01:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't the one that reverted your comment. Gary King (talk) 01:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

HelP!

Hi!

May I know what a administrator can do? I know you are online so don;t sneak around! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.95.195.187 (talk • contribs)

Peekaboo, here I am! *Pulls a quarter from behind your ear* Ta-da! Gary King (talk) 01:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I am being blocked because chatting with you...... can you tell me why? That Gwen Gale blocked me yesterday because someone vandalized... I just want to ask question also cannot;.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.95.195.187 (talk • contribs)

I have no idea! Gary King (talk) 14:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hot air balloon.

Done. · AndonicO ^Engage. 02:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay thanks Gary King (talk) 14:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Black Lagoon episodes

Responded to your last set of concerns. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 04:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't get a support for addressing all your concerns? You're harsh :p Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Done and done Gary King (talk) 15:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

FAC

Hi, just to let you know that I addressed the issues you brought up in the FAC for Battle of Verrieres Ridge. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 04:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Capped Gary King (talk) 14:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

London FAC

I think I adressed your issues on London, but the last bit of Demography and Demographics is odd. WPCITIES uses Demographics, whereas Wikipedia:UKCITIES#Demography uses Demography. I've left it as Demography for the moment, but if you still object let me know. Also I asked a question on the FAC review that you might want to address. Thanks for the comments, bsrboy (talk) 15:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have responded. Gary King (talk) 15:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Wallace S. Broecker

Mr. King-

Don't edit what you don't understand. There is a long tradition of that line being in Wally's wikipedia page; look at the page's history. Furthermore, it's factually accurate; Wally is a legendarily bad lecturer, famous for his awful jokes and long, meandering stories. Wally is to bad lectures as Dick Feynman was to great lectures; it is an essential, and imitiable, part of his personality and life as a professor. How do I know this? Because I was a student of Wally, worked at his institution, and remain active in the field ( I wrote the NADW page, which is one of the major research topics of Wally's career).

We have always had an issue with self-important editors removing any discussion of Wally's awful lectures from his Wiki page: I am going to return the line to the article. Please leave it be and refrain from vandalizing the article.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.74.48.25 (talk • contribs)

Please read WP:BLP for a better understanding of why I removed it. Gary King (talk) 15:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

arvand or shatol arab?

in international map just write arvand river i cant understand mean of shatol arab!79.132.206.227 (talk) 20:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay Gary King (talk) 20:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

whats mean of shatol arab?

in international map i see just arvand river whats mean of shatol arab? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.132.206.227 (talk • contribs)

Okay Gary King (talk) 20:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Message for my mate Gary

Hey Gary,

I'm really sorry.

How you doing today anyway? Just getting your wiki edit on or what?!

Write back,

Soon x —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.253.85 (talk • contribs)

Okay Gary King (talk) 21:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey Gary

Yeah that's what I thought Gary, what you getting up to tonight?

I just checked your stats man..

"This user has been on Wikipedia for 3 years, 7 months and 22 days."

That's amazing Gary, I think someone should make a Wikipedia page on you!

How mad would that be Gary?!

I'll catch you later man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.253.85 (talk) 21:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool Gary King (talk) 21:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/London

Hi there Gary,

Hopefully all your comments and suggestions have been answered to for the FAC for London. I'm sending you this message to let you know this. Please feel free to make any more comments on the FAC page, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/London.

Thanks in advance,

The Helpful One ^(Review) 22:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have responded. Gary King (talk) 22:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I have now  Done the replies too! :) The Helpful One ^(Review) 22:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi again Gary, do you have any more errors or fixes that need to be made to London on the FAC? Thanks. The Helpful One ^(Review) 11:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

That's it for now. I have already capped all of my comments. Gary King (talk) 20:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Assata Shakur

Thanks for your comments, Gary. I believe I have remedied them, unless you had a problem with the "Author, Year, Page" notes for sources included in the references section. Savidan 00:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Capped Gary King (talk) 21:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

SVG graphics

So much for not knowing a SVG designer. I am done with the 1946 Canadian flag with the golden maple leaf, I need to finalize it and put it on the Commons. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah alright, sounds good. Gary King (talk) 20:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

done. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:28, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Very nice indeed! Thanks. DoubleBlue (Talk) 05:15, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Germany Schulz FAC

I believe I have addressed your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Capped Gary King (talk) 20:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of New York Islanders head coaches

I've addressed your concerns. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 23:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Philadelphia Eagles first-round draft picks

Your comments have been addressed. --Gman124 ^talk 05:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1965–1966 Central African Republic coup d’état

I have addressed your concerns at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1965–1966 Central African Republic coup d’état. The article's 1a issues should be taken care of in the near future. Wackymacs is in the process of copyediting, and Ruhrfisch should be taking a look at the article in the next few days. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 14:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Help

can i help u? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.225.37 (talk) 20:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes? Gary King (talk) 20:02, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Sendai International Music Competition

I don't need to tell you, but I will anyway :p I've addressed your comment. Sunderland06 (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Striked Gary King (talk) 21:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Benjamin Franklin Tilley

I believe that I have addressed all of your comments. Can you please take a look and let me know if there are further corrections I should make? JRP (talk) 21:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Last of the Summer Wine

I have fixed all but one of the problems you pointed out and have left you a question regarding the final one. Cheers! Redfarmer (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

List of players from Puerto Rico in Major League Baseball

Hey Gary, I have worked with the points that you presented in this nomination, updates or further comments are welcome, cheers. - Caribbean~H.Q. 23:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eric Brewer (ice hockey)

Thanks for your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eric Brewer (ice hockey)! I've gone through the article and have addressed all of your concerns. I hope to gain your support. Thanks! – Nurmsook! (talk) 00:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2008 attacks on North Indians in Maharashtra

Thanks for your comments. Please have look at the addressals and also a query I have posted at the FAC. KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 (talk) 05:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:RfA courtesy blank

Done. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Holy crap, you review a lot of stuff now. Sandy must be happy for having another consistent reviewer. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I try to reach every FTC, FAC, and FLC when I can and if I have more time, then make my reviews longer. But at the very least, I try to pitch in a few suggestions if I am short on time or if the subject matter does not interest me as much. Gary King (talk) 16:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Montana class battleship

Apologies for the reposting, but you archived the other note I left ya :) A copyedit was just completed by maralia, and I have come to ask if you would recheck the article and see if the copyedit addressed your concerns (and this time, I left a link for you use :) TomStar81 (Talk) 04:45, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Use of "p" and "pp" for page-numbers in citation templates

This edit seems far off consensus for citation formatting? WP:CITE (and its WP:CITE/ES) and {{cite journal}} (and relate templates) all appear to use bare numbers in their examples. DMacks (talk) 08:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Changed back for journal references. Gary King (talk) 08:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Gary, I was just coming to follow up on this and several other comments I've seen at FAC. You're doing much better and more thorough work lately, making great finds of fixes needed on FACs, but some of your comments are personal preferences rather than guideline issues. Be sure to doublecheck my recent contribs, and let me know if you have any questions. On some of these items, it's OK to ask the nominators to be consistent in whichever style they choose, but take care that what you're asking for is actually supported by the text in the guideline page. For example, on the example above, the nominator should either use or not use p and pp on all citations; as long as they're consistent, it's fine. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Another followup: to make things worse, each citation template handles page numbers differently, so adding a p. on some templates causes a double p, for example:

• "Disaster Ascribed to Gas by Experts", The New York Times, May 7, 1937, p. p. 1.

So, all of the citations have to be carefully reviewed for consistency, and applying changes across all citation templates can result in errors. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

You may re-cap your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Assata Shakur if you are OK with Sandy's correction. Savidan 17:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Recapped Gary King (talk) 17:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Gary; I just wanted to be sure you saw it. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2006 Major League Baseball season pitching leaders

 Done « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 00:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The featured list contest

Thanks for entering the contest. You are now able to select the topic that you would like to work on. While it is a good idea to know which specific list you will work on before you select a topic, you do not have to submit your list until Thursday. Once you have a topic and a list, you can start work. However, you will not be able to submit an FLC until Sunday at 00:00 (GMT). Good luck and have fun! -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

This is just a quick reminder that you still need to pick a list and a topic. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I removed myself from the contest because I'm not sure if I have time to dedicate to it. Gary King (talk) 02:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Questions about User 72.64.154.253

I'd be grateful your opinion regarding the behavior of the anonymous user at IP 72.64.154.253 (a user you welcomed last April and thanked for his edits to Flag of Canada). All this user's contributions are exactly the same: a single edit to a Flag of ... article, described as "added info", consisting of inserting a paragraph of apparently accurate (but unsourced) text describing the flag, but without any regard to the existing content of the article, which it frequently duplicates. At this point, this person (or bot?) has edited dozens of national flag articles in this way (and has made no other kinds of edits). Do you agree that they should be asked to modify their behavior? Should all their edits be reverted, as a kind of mass short-term cleanup? Given their behavior, is it reasonable to assume good faith? If so, what would you tell them is the crux of the problem with their behavior: is it just adding unsourced content, or is it some other kind of known "problem behavior" on Wikipedia, that could be pointed out? Thanks for your help here; I'm just kind of flummoxed by what's going on here. --ScottMainwaring (talk) 06:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

This is an interesting situation. Overall, I think the only action that needs to be taken is to ask the user where they get their information from. I am assuming that it's all either from the same book or from the same website. Also, feel free to ask that the user adds references to the paragraphs they are adding. I think they are certainly doing more good than bad for the articles – especially to those that don't have a single reference. The user's additions are not very controversial, and simply explain why a flag looks the way it does without adding anything out of the ordinary. Gary King (talk) 14:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

As your advice at WP:AIV

Sorry, if I came to bring it to a wrong place, but the anon's massive blanking, 3RR violation on my talk page and inflammatory and insulting comments are, I think all vandalism.

“ My friend, the intentions behind your actions are utterly transparent to any English speaker, never mind any experienced wikipedian (e.g. attempting to set my up for a 3RR in response to your reversion. ”

“ Can I be honest, it appears to me that what you are trying to do is set me up for a complaint to an admin over some bogus charge to suit your own political agenda which appears to be Pro-Korean. ”

Please take a look at the anon's behaviors. Thanks--Caspian blue (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

It is not vandalism. You are both disputing over content. Take it to WP:ANI, but not WP:AIV. Gary King (talk) 18:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The matter is resolved now (the anon was blocked), but I'm not disputing over contents with the anon, but his uncooperative attitude and insulting comments against me. Thanks anyway.--Caspian blue (talk) 19:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)

Have I addressed your concerns at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)? Can I ask for your support?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gobots.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gobots.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly ^hi! 05:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

ze da vinci barnstar

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		For your help today at Village Pump: Technical which was a perfect solution to my problem, I award you the da Vinci Barnstar! Keep up the great work. Thanks again, xenocidic (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! Gary King (talk) 18:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

meine dashboard

who else did you see who pilfered it? as far as I know, it should work fine when transcluded. modularization sounds like fun but I'm gunna hold off on that until someone requests it or it grows too large. xenocidic (talk) 15:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Only Keeper is using it for now. There are others who linked to the dashboard for when they need it. Gary King (talk) 15:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I added a lil bit 'o sneakiness so I can hopefully snoop on anyone else who robbes it =) xenocidic (talk) 15:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Facebook

Hey Gary, you're probably getting a bit sick of hearing about it (:-)), but do you think you could help out at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Facebook/1? If you want to work on it I'm happy to pitch in...! giggy _(:O) 09:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help; however, I am trying to focus on working on only one article at a time these days (I haven't done major article work in the past week or two at all.) I still hope to bring the article to FAC again one day, which shouldn't be too far from now, but it needs a lot of work so I will do it when the article(s) that I am currently working on are done. Gary King (talk) 15:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Hi THere, I just made my 1,000th edit and wanted to use the Milestones box you had on my user page. I copied and changed what you had on yours but I wanted to make sure it was ok with you. IF it wasn't feel free to revert my edit to my user page. Thanks! !!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealth500 (talk • contribs)

Yeah, go ahead, it's not up to me to decide who gets to use what on my user page anyways. Gary King (talk) 22:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks! Stealth (talk) 22:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Worlds End State Park thanks

	Thanks for your comments on Worlds End State Park which made Featured Article today! Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Main page

Congrats. DoubleBlue (Talk) 00:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Congrats indeed, glad to see a Canadian subject on the Main Page! About 48 hours after the end of your special day, check out this link to see how many hits the article got. The last article I worked on for the main page (Prince's Palace of Monaco, helped clean it up & re-reference it for the event) had 69,900+ hits on the big day. I bet this article will be well up there too! Risker (talk) 00:53, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately it's not Call of Duty 4, another article I brought to FA, which I actually think would get even more hits! :D Gary King (talk) 00:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:Main page FA

Nice to see your work displayed to millions, eh? Congrats. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

		Creatures of Impulse
		Thanks for the review at FAC! The article has now passed! =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:14, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

FLCs

Hi Gary, hope you're well. Can I just get you to recheck FLCs were you've commented but then haven't offered a support/oppose/otherwise? We've got loads of FLCs right now which seem, on the face of it, to be up to scratch but which lack any kind of consensual support. Keep up the great reviewing work, all the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Mission 4

Mission 4, a series of articles on the Everglades, could do with help from the FA-Team! Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 12:59, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Governors of Ohio

I've responded to your concerns, so please check it out again. :) --Golbez (talk) 19:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The Citation Challenge

Someone has made it to level one!

LAAFan is now working on achieving level two.

Are you going to let him stay ahead of you?

Just curious.  :)

The Transhumanist 20:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Feature Article Candidate Roman Catholic Church

This is a formal notification.

The nomination of the above article was archived by the Featured Articles Director, with the comment that the page had again grown too long. He has asked that all remaining objectors produce a list of their specific problems with the article in its current form. These will then be addressed by the article's editorial team before re-presentation for FA status.

Can you therefore please post a complete list of any specific remaining objections you may have on the article's talk page at: Talk:Roman_Catholic_Church. If possible can we have this list in by the end of June, so that editors can begin to address them all in detail in July. To prevent the nomination again becoming over-long, we would ask that you raise ALL of your remaining concerns at this stage, making your comments as specific and comprehensive as possible. It would help if all your comments were gathered under your name in a single heading on the page. Thank you. Xandar (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

You should withdraw the PR of Noble Gases

The article is being reviewed, and once it passes, it would be submitted directly for FAC. The PR will take forever, end if ppl waited this long to review it for GA, then little feedback will be provided by a PR. Seriously, just withdraw it and wait a few days for a FAC. Nergaal (talk) 08:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I will let it run until I submit the article to FAC. Gary King (talk) 15:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: SimCity 4

When I've got time, I'd be happy to work on it. I haven't played a Sim game since SimCity back on my Macintosh IIci, but I guess I know my way around enough video game articles :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 16:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Civilization 4 is another article I'd like to work on; it's another great intellectually challenging game, like SimCity and Myst, in my opinion. Gary King (talk) 16:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to also note that "Development" sections are probably my biggest weakness in video game articles, so I will need some help there especially. You seem to find some pretty good sources for those. Where do you go to find them? Gary King (talk) 17:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to copy your stuff here... I'll find them :P I get all my print sources from a ProQuest accound OranL was kind enough to share with me... I do agree that the development is sometimes the hardest. I'll take looksees when I can (got to deal with anything at my FAC right now.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Sega 32X games

Hi, Gary King. I normally don't leave messages about addressing concerns, but I've addressed your concerns and others at the FLC above that you previously commented on, and I was wondering if you'd be willing to support, oppose, or leave more comments if you find it necessary. Thank you for your time, and sorry if I'm bugging you with this. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I have capped my comments. Gary King (talk) 15:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

In precisely the same tone, I'd be enormously grateful if you could review the changes I made at your suggestion to the hare coursing FA candidate and advise if I've missed any. Many thanks. MikeHobday (talk) 20:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Capped Gary King (talk) 04:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Donald Bradman FAC

Thanks for your very useful comments! I've now responded on all of them. Please do check that you're content. Cheers --Dweller (talk) 18:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Capped Gary King (talk) 04:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

re: Noble gas

I can probably take a peek tomorrow, as I have a few other things queued up. --Laser brain (talk) 20:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I read it through today and I don't think it's too technical. Many readers will have to follow wikilinks for explanations, but those explanations would be outside the scope of the article. Raul had an FA pass recently that was (to me) way more technical than this and I still considered it accessible. Good luck on the peer review. --Laser brain (talk) 23:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks Gary King (talk) 04:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

ur crazy

Yearly archives?! and here I was wondering if I should start breaking up my months into parts! xenocidic (talk) 20:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I like the simplicity of it, I guess. I find it insane to split up archives into so many pages, to be honest. I hope my user page and my talk page both make it blatantly obvious that I prefer to keep things simple when I can :p Gary King (talk) 04:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, but what about when it exceeds 1 mb?! heh xenocidic (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Nah, it will probably never grow that big... :p Gary King (talk) 06:01, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

GK, GK

Hello, Mr. King. Came across this recently & thought you might find it interesting:

• King, Gary. 1995. "Replication, Replication." Political Science & Politics (September): pp. 444-452,

whether or not you're the same GK.

I did not think of this before now, but on the table-of-contents matter for the Econ. article a few months ago, which your Edit drew attention to, I tried to make the case on the corresponding Talk page section for including 3rd-level headings while noting the case for the other side. I believe that the substance there was OK, but in retrospect, I wish that I had used a heading less sharply put, such as "Inclusion or exclusion of fields besides Micro/Macro in the TOC." Please allow me, however belatedly, to express regret for not thinking of that. I think a still-better solution was moving Micro/Macro down a heading level to make them symmetric the other subject areas. This might well not have happened without your having raised the question in the first place. So, thank you for that too. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 14:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Which particular edit are you referring to? Please link me to it – thanks! Gary King (talk) 04:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, there were several Edits, such as then-sect. 4 located at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Economics&diff=208382667&oldid=208378095, per table of contents at top for then-sect. (best viewed directly -- non-mark-up), aimed at symmetry & simplicity (more at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Economics&action=history of course). There has also been some blending of related sections & elimination of unnecessary 3rd-level headings. I think that the table of contents is now easier to follow as a result. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 15:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC) Oops (correction above). "Blending," yes. "Bending," I hope not. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 15:00, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Gary King (talk) 06:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:FLC "urgent box"

When transcluded on WP:FLC, the columns are weird. See Image:Urgent box.jpg, but do it quickly cause it's a copyrighted screenshot and will be deleted in a few days. -- Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem has been resolved. Gary King (talk) 06:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Uriel Sebree

Thank you for your comment on my FAC; I've made the one little change that you suggested. (I had converted nearly all the ranges to en dashes already, but it seems that I missed at least one.) If you see any other improvements that I can make this to article, please let me know. JRP (talk) 12:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I have striked my comment. Gary King (talk) 06:03, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi there!

I seemed to have addressed all your comments on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates#List of Twin Peaks episodes. I has already been ten days since its nomination, and if you provide your support or objection, the FLC directors may be able to provide a consensus on what is to be made of the article. Thank you. (SUDUSER)₈₅ 05:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I have capped my comments. Gary King (talk) 06:28, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD/WP:LOTM

Congratulations List of wealthiest foundations has been selected as a July WP:LOTD. It will appear in the WP:LOTD template for one day as an LOTD. If you have any preference on a days during July let me know before June 24th. If you have any other lists that you feel should be nominated next month please ad them at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Nominees/200808.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of 2006 Major League Baseball all-stars

How does it look now (obviously the article - not the FLC) Thanks, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 00:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

FAC note

Gary, when articles have faulty footnote placement (WP:FN) as well as endash issues, you might want to refer the nominators to User:Brighterorange. His script fixes both of those items ... preferable to having nominators do that tedious and irritating work. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

WP Computing

Greetings. You are receiving this note as you are a member of this WikiProject. Currently there is not much of activity in the project and I am hoping to revive the project with your help. I have made a few changes to the project page Diff. You are welcome to make suggestions of improvement / changes in the design. I have also make a proposal to AutoTagg articles with {{WikiProject Computing}} for the descendant wikiprojects articles also. Please express your opinion here -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 12:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts from your coach

As I probably need two of my current four FLCs to run through before going on another article writing spree (damn I haven't done that in a while), I'll leave some comments as your admin coach. For the purposes of discussion, I'll separate this into sections.

1. Time - we're nearing the three month mark since your previous RfA, which is sufficient in the grand majority of cases to deflect the "OMG, power hunger" !votes that often appear for users that jump the gun too soon after their previous RfA. If you want, you certainly can wait longer to discount such opposes completely, but three months is generally the unofficial time between RfAs that is generally acceptable.
2. Civility - if anything, you've gotten much better in this regard, as I can see by going down your archive (split that thing, it's absolutely enormous, if convienient). Your commentary at FAC/FLC/FTC is always civil and constructive, as is your conduct elsewhere.
3. Administrative areas - the big caveat this time around is that you don't really need a strong participation per se in order to succeed per a nice example: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Karanacs. The big clincher in this case is your answer to question one, where you can note that you want to use the tools during your article writing process, for any problems at FAC/FLC/FTC nominations, and for template/coding stuff (since you said previously that you wanted to be involved in that and commented as such). That said, your partipation at WP:AIV and WP:RFP has been good (nice job on taking up some clerking as I suggested), and you've been going crazy with Huggle (your reports/reverts look pretty solid though, so it's a plus).
4. Content contributions - well, I guess I should start more writing, or I'm going to be unseated at WP:WBFLN sometime in the future :p (you've already tied me at WP:WBFTN) But in all seriousness, your article writing is beyond reproach, and you're solid in this aspect for a future RfA.
5. Comments from previous RfA - the big concern everyone has was with Pedro's concerns that you didn't heed criticism well with the category tagging thing, and I think I can safely say that you've certainly changed well in this regard. The other one was that you were simply going too fast with your edits and without care. You still go fast, but your edits are thought-out much better. Heck, fast is probably good, considering that the fast stuff is FAC/FLC/FTC commentary or Huggle edits.

As soon as the three month mark goes by (July 11), feel free to ask me to nominate you again, but my main reason for bringing this up (other than keep up the good work) is to ask other users to evaluate you (possibly open another editor review), especially the users that opposed your previous RfA. Again, all this is up to you, but I stand by my comments a while ago that having the tools is always a net plus for any good editor. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 04:47, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

No idea why this page is on my watchlist, but I bags co-nomming! :-) giggy _(:O) 04:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC) (If you'll have me, that is!)

In terms of the going too fast, an area in which you could improve is to make meaningful reviews at FAC; adding on a couple of comments about minor MoS issues to every FAC isn't as useful as a solid, thorough review of an entire article, or if you were to specialize in a certain area (all of MoS, or images, or sources, for example). Currently, you add a couple of quickie comments to every FAC, and those minor comments don't really have a big impact on improving articles or helping close FACs as either promoted or archived. I most like the reviews that help promote an article, and if not that, at least help me know the nom needs to be archived. Of course, the worst are the premature supports that cause other reviewers to work extra hard to make up the difference, but you don't do much of that. You also could be better about revisiting FACs you've entered declarations on, to update where you stand on old opposes, for example. Another area you could improve is by taking the time to read through every FAC and realize the kinds of things you're not picking up or, every now and then, misstating. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:56, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I try to reach every FAC if time permits so I can keep committed to reviewing FACs. If I come across an FAC that I like in particular, then I will give a much more thorough review as I have done in several instances. I think every comment I have given so far is actionable, too. Gary King (talk) 18:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)

You had made fairly significant critical commentary at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago) without voicing an opinion. The discussion had to be restarted. I continue to believe that this is the best WP article ever written on a building under construction and hope you might consider voicing an opinion on the matter.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

List of Oakland Raiders head coaches FLC

Do you have anymore feedback on this? Buc (talk) 13:02, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you not going to sup or opp? Buc (talk) 18:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Signature

You've changed your signature - what happened to that special K? :( - tholly ^--Turnip-- 20:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. Why, did you like it? Gary King (talk) 20:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Not sure really, I was just used to it. - tholly ^--Turnip-- 20:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess it doesn't look as good without the italics. I'll put that back in, and let's see how that goes. Gary King (talk) 20:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I feel better already! - tholly ^--Turnip-- 20:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I just ran over here, your K wasn't on a slant, I panicked, I was flustered, I'm so glad you went back. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 02:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I'm sorry to have panicked so many of you guys :) Gary King (talk) 02:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad it's not just me then. - tholly ^--Turnip-- 07:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Another retarded question from donut boy

What do you mean when you say "reassess the article yourself."" Also, should I submit to the board for assesment if its not anywhere near featured article-quality? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ISmellDonuts (talk • contribs) 03:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Warren NY FTC

I wanted to get your attention since you struck out your support that after a bunch of work - all articles now meet the criteria for a FT. If you could take a look and leave your opinion - it would be good.Mitch32 14:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of acquisitions by Apple Inc.

Gary, I've replied to your response and added some links to reliable sources you can use to expand the article. Hope it helps. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 16:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I'll take a look at those. The list also had other companies before, but I removed them because I couldn't find them on the SEC. I still think that the companies you mention could be found in SEC filings if they were indeed acquired; the SEC filings also have the extra advantage of listing the date of acquisition and the value of it. As these types of lists are still pretty new and no real standard has been set, I think we should set some sort of precedence for future lists like this. The other ones I had used any reliable reference available, but some worded their news reports in such a way that you couldn't tell whether if it was 100% verified (such as, "Apple is thought to have acquired X company"). I would not include ones that don't seem completely sure, but many news reports, especially about Apple as you probably know, are usually more vague than others. Gary King (talk) 16:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I've replied too. I think that if anything can be found in the SEC from this will be very good, but otherwise things should not be included. - tholly ^--Turnip-- 16:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied again. Are you saying Macworld is an unreliable source? As the largest Mac magazine, in publication since 1984, I would always trust the information they report. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 16:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

No; I'm saying that all acquisition lists should ideally only use the SEC as a reference, so future debates similar to the one we're having don't spring up :) Do you mind if I move the discussion to the FLC's talk page (I'll add a link) and then we don't have to move between user talk pages and the nomination page? Gary King (talk) 16:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I've also re-replied. I don't know much about MacWorld, but it seemed to be a fan website which is not as reliable (correct me if I'm wrong). However as you (Wackymacs) mentioned, company websites would be good. [Please move this.] - tholly ^--Turnip-- 16:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

re:FLC

how is it now? Nergaal (talk) 20:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Noble gas

Hi Gary, I like the article v. much. It's on my watchlist—more suggestions to come and I foresee my support at its FAC. It's past my bedtime, but I look forward to reviewing Noble gas on Friday. Best wishes, Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 22:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Halloween (franchise)

Hello Gary. I removed some contents in this article because of some issues regarding citations/sourcing. See here. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 07:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Noble gas

Well, I took Chemistry my Junior year in high school. But yeah, I'll be happy to give the article a review. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool, then. ;) Do you think you have time to review an article? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you review Survivor Series (1994)? Since, its one of the un-reviewed articles in the backlog at GAN. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't like to be selfish and stuff, but if you are still interested, can you look at Ben Affleck's article? Um, I personally don't know about the holds being "on hold" for too long, but there was a discussion at WT:GAN, see here. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you want me to do the review, even though there's a peer review open? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, just wanted to know. I'll hit you when I'm done with the review. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Question: Have you been aware of this? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

After reading this, it seems the article has improved beyond it and I agree, the article should pass to GA. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:26, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

You should be glad. ;) Oh, I forgot to ask, is 'History' a better header than 'Discovery', per here. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I just wanted to know. Do you want me to review Radon instead? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

• It is called co-nomination :). Go ahead and type/fill in the nomination. Nergaal (talk) 20:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, with your writing, I think the article can be written as well as Noble gas. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Done. I'll give the article a review, once I'm done with your GA review of Ben Affleck. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'm done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the review. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, go ahead and add the template and review the article. I've had to do that with couple of articles that I was reviewing. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Question: For Liv Tyler's article, what exactly is wrong with the book ref.? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll review it. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I have a new siganture

I am trying on a new look for my signature. How's everybody like it? :) Gary King (talk) 05:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. giggy _(:O) 09:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

You changed your sig ! I am so happy; better than chocolate. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

The slanted K was making me woozy, especially when I lacked sleep. Gary King (talk) 17:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess this is better than your last new signature, as the 'K' is the same size as the rest. The last effort had the 'K' still big, and that was too like your old one. - tholly ^--Turnip-- 18:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, you enjoy your new signiture, Im supprised I even noticed considering the rules on natural law seem to have disappeared on wikipedia today. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 03:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

That's unfortunate :/ I'm glad you noticed though... Gary King (talk) 03:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I think ive finally warmed to my sig, I think it reflects me quite well. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 03:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, I think it's a bit too bright. I'm sure you've heard that more than once before, though :p Gary King (talk) 03:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Lol too many times, but it doesn't harm anyone (so long as you dont have that illness where bright colours cause a fit). I forget the English name for it. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 03:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

← I think you are referring to schizophrenia. Gary King (talk) 04:00, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

No, found it, you guys call it Photosensitive epilepsy. My friend has that, its nasty, bright colours are a no-no. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 04:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, right. Gary King (talk) 04:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

GA passes

It seems you left several of the GA passes incomplete. I am a main editor of Cloud Gate, Wrigley Square, Harris Theater (Chicago), and Boeing Galleries. I noticed that you did not pay attention to the passing procedures at WP:GAN. In particular, step 3 was not followed correctly so the review date is wrong. Step 5 and 6 seem not to have been followed correctly. I am attempting to clean up the work, but I think you may have been involved in several other reviews that were not properly completed. You may want to pay closer attention to the procedures. I just modified them slightly to make the steps clearer.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I will ensure that when I pass or fail an article for a Good Article nomination in the future, I will update the timestamp to reflect the date of the review. Gary King (talk) 17:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Review of First-move advantage in chess

Many thanks for your constructive comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/First-move advantage in chess, which helped to improve the article and reach the FA level! SyG (talk) 17:24, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Reviews

hi, yes, the new GA template should automatically transclude the review into a new section on the article talk page but there seem to be problems. i have had to manually transclude once, i'm guessing you mean cologne mosque project so will go and manually write again if necessary, thanks Tom (talk) 21:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

at the top of wp:GAN it has a note about the revised GAN template but then on the fail instructions a little way down state: 'state which criteria were not met on the article's talk page' which seem inconsistent with the notice. i've just seen that the notice is wrong: 'using the new this discussion for more information'Tom (talk) 21:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

i've just corrected it which is why it will look better now. were there any particular articles you think the explanation had been missed on? i quick-failed a couple. was going to quick fail Michaelangelo but saw you'd covered that.Tom (talk) 21:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

yes i know and have been attempting this. were there any where you think it has not been transcluded? there must have been at least one which prompted you to alert me. Tom (talk) 21:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

regarding leaving space. the transclusion automatically writes the message so there's not really any option to leave space, unless i is missing something? Tom (talk) 22:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

SENS

Hi, per your suggestion, I would like to withdraw my nomination. Not sure how it should be done though? --Phenylalanine (talk) 00:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Adaptation.

I just wanted to say thanks for reviewing the article.—Wildroot (talk) 06:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Sigismunda mourning over the Heart of Guiscardo

Everything is done. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Noble gas

That's fine, but one of the ce mavens is bound to pick up the split infinitive. With mp/bp it was more the respective that I was concerned about since it implied to me that we were comparing across the period rather than for each element. Good luck jimfbleak (talk) 07:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

FLC:List of elements by stability of isotopes

I think I finished going through all your comments. What do you think now of the list? Nergaal (talk) 08:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Wilcher

Thomas Wilcher's GA on hold concerns have been addressed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Given my notes above, I had expected you would complete the pass procedure this time. Last time I cleaned it up. Would you finish the procedures this time.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:30, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I always do the mandatory steps; several steps are optional. For instance, WP:GA sums up the total number of Good Articles once in a while from the numbers of each category. Gary King (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

GA:Radon

I ahve finished with the referrencing of of everything except the last section. The reviewer's comments say that 1st and 3rd paragraph there do not have refs. The problem is that the information there is repeated in other paragraphs where there are refs. S if you wikify the entire section, there shouldn't be problems with refs anymore. Nergaal (talk) 09:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

One odd problem on my browser (Firefox 3, modern skin) is that the underline for the first section heading runs across the infobox, and did before Nergaal's tweaks. Doesn't happen on other pages, so perhaps it's the narrowness of the box? Just wondering. jimfbleak (talk) 12:08, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Screenshot Image:Screenshot2.jpg jimfbleak (talk) 05:38, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

As I say, just wondering, so no big deal jimfbleak (talk) 05:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Capping

No clue who did it, honestly, and it wasn't that big a deal that I felt the need to dig through diffs to see who did. Sorry if I sounded snippy, just was trying to figure out how the FAC page suddenly changed fonts this morning! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:Avicennism/GA1

Salam, Thanks for your review. I was sure that I isn't a good article, but I seeks some good points to improve. Please write a complete review on the basis of the procedure which is explained here. --Seyyed(t-c) 01:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Rfa?

I was wondering if you would like to apply for Rfa? You are definitely ready, and I would be willing to nominate you, as I'm sure so would other users. Thanks, --Meldshal42 (talk) 13:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

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

FLCs

Hey. As one of WP:FLCs biggest contributors, I was hoping to ask you to revisit some (or all!) of the lists you've reviewed recently and see if any concerns you might have raised have subsequently been addressed. FLCs are gaining a lot of interest and plenty of comments but not many supports or opposes - while the "four supports" minimum has been removed, lists still need community consensus for them to be promoted. Thanks for your contributions so far, keep up the great work. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Deep breath! Okay, so (1) I won't support or oppose - I see that as a conflict of interest, other editors are quite capable of providing this, and (2) I promote one at a time because before I promote any list I give it a final detailed review and make minor WP:MOS, typo, etc corrections so promoting en-mass is not something I'm going to do. It's not a problem for you really, is it? ;-p The Rambling Man (talk) 18:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and a thousand thanks for everything you do for the process, you're invaluable. I noticed you've been encouraged to run at RFA again. You'd get my support, for what it's worth... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool, well don't let me miss out on helping! And are you okay with the way I'm "running" my side of FLC? It's different, I know, but I refuse to pass a list which I'm not happy with, so it takes time... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Hang on, I can see them.. aaarrgghh....! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's true but you enter into a dodgy canvassing situation then. However, you're right, it's not up to the directors to go round gaining support for a nomination. Also, right now the biggest problem FLC has is that people nominate lists which aren't ready and should be peer reviewed first. FLC has become an extension to the PR process. Reviewers leave comments aplenty and then don't come back. I'm considering a "quick fail" mechanism whereby if a list fails, say, a five point MOS checklist, it's removed immediately with relevant help for the nominator. Especially as a number of lists have many common failures (most of which you pick up - dashes, bold titles, citation placements etc). I'll think it through some more and then propose it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Template limits

Gary, I suppose you've seen the problem that Wikipedia:Template limits is causing in the FAC archives, discussed at Wikipedia talk:FAC#Template limit again. I believe I've eliminated enough caps to resolve the problem in the June archives, but it will again be an issue in July. I see you've been capping a lot of very short comments; it's the number of caps that causes the problem, so we should reserve them for capping extremely long commentary (which really should go on talk pages anyway, but that's another issue). If/as you have time, would you mind going through the current FACs and removing your caps, just entering a line below your comments stating that they are resolved? Also, very short commentary that doesn't substantially affect the FAC can be entered on the article talk page in the future, if that helps. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:56, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I've only got four caps at the moment; however, I have removed three. Gary King (talk) 21:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Gary. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

FLC poke

Hi there Gary, would you mind revisiting List of Crimean War Victoria Cross recipients to see if you have any issues with it? Could I then ask you to state an explicit opinion on the FLC. Thanks, regards. Woody (talk) 19:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I have given more comments. Gary King (talk) 21:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied over there. Thanks. Woody (talk) 22:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I just reread my replies to you and they seem excessively brutish and for that I feel I must apologise. I was just reading through the OM mess and it seems to have distracted me. Thankyou very much for taking the time to review the list, it is truly appreciated. Best regards. Woody (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Introduction to virus

Hi Gary, I know you are busy with Noble gas's FA candidature, but, should you have time, can you take a look at this? Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 21:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I have made some minor changes, but I didn't find any major issues with the article. Gary King (talk) 21:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of timekeeping devices.

Don't think your concerns have been fixed? · AndonicO ^Engage. 21:14, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I removed the cap because there was no need to cap such short comments. Gary King (talk) 21:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

FLC List of baryons.

You've listed some improvements that could be made to the list of baryons a while ago. I've made them so I wondered if you could vote either for or against it since it only received 1 vote (other than mine). Thanks. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 00:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I have supported the article. Great job! Gary King (talk) 01:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Review Club de Gimnasia y Esgrima La Plata

Hi Gary, I create solved all the proposed one and in addition it has 39 references more. Thanks. --Elnegrojose (talk) 00:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I have responded on your talk page. Gary King (talk) 01:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

GA nomination for Effects of Hurricane Charley in North Carolina

Hey, sorry to bother, but I was just curious in regards to your recent passing of the aforementioned article. You changed the talk page to indicate its GAC was passed, but you didn't change any of the GA pages (such as rm'ing it from the GA candidates page, adding it to the list of GA's, etc). I wasn't sure if you were going to wait, or if you just forgot, so I just thought I'd give you the heads up. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up; I forgot to do the last few steps. Gary King (talk) 01:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

ICP FAC

Hi. I don't know if you've noticed or not, but I responded to your comment at the Insane Clown Posse FAC a couple of days ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibaranoff24 (talk • contribs)

Gary King (talk) 21:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Dulwich College GA nomination

Thank you for your imput. I have made a comment on the talk page. Bensonby (talk) 11:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I have responded. Gary King (talk) 21:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Second opinion

Hi, Gary King, I've seen your frequent and fair WP:GAC reviews, and I was wondering if you would be willing to give a second opinion on my thoughts of a recently passed article, Dol Guldur. In short, I think the promotion was premature and the article requires far more work. I have been told that my requirements for GA are higher than most, however, so I would like to know your thoughts on the matter. My comments are here, please feel free to either agree or disagree and give your own comments. María (habla conmigo) 15:23, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi; unfortunately, book articles, and especially fictional books, are not my forte, so I think I will pass. Gary King (talk) 21:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Question

No, you just go ahead in the review. If, of course, the person who nominated the article does not get what you left in the review, within the limits of the 7 days required, then you have to fail the article. But, you still continue on with the review though. Hope that made sense. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I'm reviewing the Incredible Hulk right now, but after I'm done, I'll review the Halloween franchise. ;) Don't worry, I'll get to it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha, beat you to it. I'm just kidding. ;) That's probably why, not to get "spoiled" and stuff. Don't worry, you'll have the review; You have my word. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I'll keep that in mind. And, congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Of course I watchlist them. Now, I think I have to. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

FAR preload

Gary, would you be interested in working on this? Please respond there so everyone can be in the loop. What we most need is for the notification instructions at Template:FAR-instructions to be made clear to the nominators. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I have responded there. Gary King (talk) 22:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

GAN:Radon

Since it was promoted, now I have a question: is there a bot to update the history of the article? Nergaal (talk) 18:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

GimmeBot will get to it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, the idea of featured topic was there for a long time (check history here, or this archive). As for the nomination, I submitted it in a hurry and did not have time to fill in all the contribuitors. :| Nergaal (talk) 22:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Wow, you're reverting very fast, and it seems like you keep beating me! Have this barnstar. -- SchfiftyThree 02:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 03:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers

Thank's for the welcome. Cheers! Skipper 360 (talk) 07:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

No problemo! Gary King (talk) 07:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't want to be a pain...

...but I'm going to be! If you get a chance, can you now offer a support, oppose or further comments (whichever you see fit) to List of Maryland state highways, List of South American countries and List of Crimean War Victoria Cross recipients FLCs? They're kind of stagnating and I'd hate to remove them as no consensus for the sake of it. Thanks for all your hard work so far. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I left some notes on all of them. Gary King (talk) 07:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal

Hi there, I've added a good deal of information and tried to reference everything I can, do you think this article would be worth resubmitting for GA status? I plan to visit the library this week for more information and references. Parrot of Doom (talk) 19:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the article is getting there, but still needs more references added. I would recommend holding off on renominating it until at the very least, every paragraph has a reference at the end of them. This is, of course, not mandatory, but it would clearly convey that all of the information has been referenced. Cheers! Gary King (talk) 21:33, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I have a headache now, been in the library all day :) I've added a fair bit to it and referenced just about everything I can. Unfortunately there aren't too many other takers to improve it :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 16:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thriller (album) FA review

Hi I resolved your minor points the other day, are they resolved to standard? Cheers :-) — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 12:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep – I have striked out my comments! Gary King (talk) 17:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Operation Varsity FAC

Hi there. I'd like to thank-you very much for your comments and help with Operation Varsity and its FAC. This is only my first time, as you probably realized during your review of the article, but I was wondering what happens now that I've settled the specific comments that you made about the article, in terms of supporting or opposing the article. Thanks again for your help. Skinny87 (talk) 16:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have striked out my comments. Cheers! Gary King (talk) 17:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Happy Canada Day everyone!

This is just a random note – happy Canada Day everyone! Gary King (talk) 17:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Random Act of Kindness Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For defiantly going out of your way to be very kind to all users, and giving me that good feeling as soon as I joined by sending me that welcome message, I hereby present thee the Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar! Ojay123 (talk) 00:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 03:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Attack of the Clones GA

See if it needs more work to pass (and don't mind I added many references from Starwars.com) igordebraga ≠ 00:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll check it out. Please add new discussions to the GA subpage in the future though, since I already watch that ;) Gary King (talk) 03:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Ready?

I think I'm overstating the "OMG power hunger" feeling, so whenever you want to try at WP:RFA, give me a shout (give User:Giggy one too, as he wanted to co-nom :p). Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 10:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

And he's watchlisting this page like a hawk, too! —Giggy 10:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll go again perhaps in a few weeks, but certainly no earlier than the first week of July; I have my own reasons :) Gary King (talk) 16:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

It's the first week of July now... ;-) (take your time!) —Giggy 08:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Oo, oo! Me too please. Just take your time and make sure sure all your edits are good! That's what "they" check out at Rfa. --Meldshal42 (talk) 19:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Kudos!

Thanks for the welcome package, the info was very helpful and I appreciate your show of kindness and enthusiasm.
Cheers & best of luck to you. Starlightning (talk) 05:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem! Gary King (talk) 16:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

More FLC revisits

Hi Gary, a couple more revisits if you'd be so kind:

1. List of Twin Peaks episodes
2. List of Chinese inventions

Could you either support/oppose/comment further and let me know when you've done so please? All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 13:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Responded Gary King (talk) 16:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

L. Patrick Gray

Hi, thanks for your reviews of the GA Nomination for the L. Patrick Gray article, it's been helpful. I also wanted to ask your opinion on something. I noticed that a lot of the statements that have been attributed to the Gray autobiography, In Nixon's Web (INW) can just as easily be attributed to some of the sources provided in the "External links" section. Do you think it would be worthwhile, since the vast majority of the references provided are to INW, to switch some of the references to the appropriate external link?

In other words, the information provided in the article would remain the same, but the references would be more evenly distributed amongst the available publications (and more of it would be available online). I don't think this would make a big difference, except only that it might limit any impression that the article was created almost entirely from one source, even though INW does cover almost all of it.

Thanks again for your input and I hope to hear your thoughts soon. (Morethan3words (talk) 17:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC))

K, thanks, I'll work on that now. If you have any other thoughts on the article, I'd be all ears ;-) (Morethan3words (talk) 17:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC))

Question From Ojay 123

I was wondering how to have multiple columns in my user page. I have seen many users have multiple columns, and I would like to use them as well.

--Ojay123 (talk) 20:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Artist Page

I am a promoter in the music industry and I can't seem to construct a page like the other artists that are on Wikipedia. It also seems that other actors and musician have thier own Wikipedia link. How do I upload or begin constructing an artist page. I have the bio listed and that's it. I want to upload a profile picture and start adding other information. I'm pretty good with html but I dont know if it works on this system. I just need a push in the right direction!!!

Many thanks!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toneblacq (talk • contribs) 21:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Votin twice on RfA the same way (Neutral)

Oops. Should I change it? Bearian (talk) 00:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Double welcomes?

Youre keen :) SatuSuro 02:43, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Whoopsie Gary King (talk) 04:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Bolds

Hi, I've removed the bolds from List of Twin Peaks episodes. (SUDUSER)₈₅ 03:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright, thanks Gary King (talk) 04:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for welcome

Thank you for welcome, I appreciate it. --9K58 (talk) 03:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) Gary King (talk) 04:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: your Welcome

I just read your message of welcome, you say "welcome to Wikipedia!".

Of course I know that is just a default message, but not lucky, I just get very sad of wiki wikipedia at this moment. Your words touch my feeling...--Joshuacheung (talk) 13:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Bryan Adams discography

I responded to your concerns here. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 08:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I have striked out my points. Gary King (talk) 15:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Home Birth site

Hi Gary, I have posted a link on the Home Birth page to a very interesting site which shows lots of educational footage of births and pregnancy and it keeps being removed, why is this? Kerryrichardson (talk) 09:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Please take a look at WP:FIRST. Gary King (talk) 15:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Piedmont Park Review

Thank you for your review! I have made the modifications that you mentioned. Please let me know what else you may need. SweetMelissaGT (talk) 16:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Adding Pictures

I am having trouble adding photos to articles. Is there a template for that?

--Ojay123 (talk) 16:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Thanks for the welcome message. I put a note on my home page confessing that I've been around a long time, and that this is a sock-puppet alias to keep some semblance of division between my personal and professional life. Nice to see the welcome wagon is alive and well. Dispersion (talk) 18:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Pre-review request

Hi. I'm thinking of nominating the List of Dukes and Grand Dukes of Mecklenburg for FL, but before I do so, I wonder if you could perhaps give it a look and let me know if it seems it might pass, or if it needs substantial extra work before being ready. Thank you for your consideration. Biruitorul ^Talk 19:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot; I'll try to make some improvements. Biruitorul ^Talk 21:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:My sig

Yes I know that there is an open italics tag, that was done on purpose so that the timestamp would be italic, going in line with my sig. I have had this for a very long time, and have never had anyone say anything. If for some weird reason someone trys to append text directly after my sig, then I will just fix it. But thanks for the heads up. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 01:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Drew Barrymore

Thanks for the review. ;) Question: Do you think Drew Barrymore's article has a chance at FA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've seen example FA's (Reese Witherspoon, Eric Bana, and Katie Holmes) and you know, I thought maybe her article was somewhere in there. I guess I'll ask for peer review advice and see where that goes. Thanks again, though. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess I'll have to read some more and try to expand her article. Great. Anyways, I agree with you, The Dark Knight will be the greatest film in the year, hell, even in the decade. I haven't seen Wall-E, but I heard its good. So, are you saying that you would like to get Christian Bale's article to FA? Since, its a GA already. Oh, the article that I had in mind to work on is Heath Ledger's, but I can't, since its protected and stuff. Hey, you can work on Christopher Nolan's or Aaron Eckhart's articles, part of the Dark Knight. Theodore Kaczynski, seems like a "tense" article to work on. I tried during my fair share to, maybe, get Joker's article to GA, but its too complicated. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, that's what I'll work on then. ;) Then, forget the "bomber" and work on Christian's article. I'm just kidding. Yeah, when Heath's death was announced, that's when the article became "locked" and stuff, IMO, that would be a great article to have as GA. Ooh, trying to study the "crazy" life? Yeah, but Joker's origin or beginning story is in the Killing Joke and well, he was created in the Golden Age era or something, IDK its too complicated and so I quit. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Aww, you did got me there. ;) Nicely done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Kaczynski

Nice work, Gary.

Thanks for pointing out the cite web issue; yes, I didn't know what to do about it. Please see Lightmouse's query at my talk—it would be great to determine a good prescription to solve this issue and neutralise it as a lead weight on the "disciplined-linking" cause. Tony (talk) 10:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Faces of Fear and The Mega Bucks

Thank you for reviewing these articles. I have replied to both reviews. Please let me know if you have any further concerns. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply at Talk:Faces of Fear. I have wikilinked the dates. GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Another Question

I hate to ask you a million questions, but is there a way to delete photos from wikimedia commons?

--Ojay123 (talk) 16:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/National Basketball Association Most Valuable Player Award

Replies. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 18:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Boy Scouts of America

We've addressed your concerns here. Please review. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Los Angeles Lakers first and second round draft picks

Done. Annoyomous24 (talk) 00:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Vancouver Canucks head coaches

Done. Annoyomous24 (talk) 00:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

cite web strategy

Gary, thx muchly for your work on this. I think we need to wait a couple of days to see whether there's going to be flack. Then perhaps a formal proposal and call for supports/opposes. Then we go to Shoe thing, the admin who made the last change there (or are you an admin?). Tony (talk) 06:19, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The Myst Reader GA

I've gone through and fixed the points you brought up as well as a few others I found while looking. When you've got the time, take another gander. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 16:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Proposals

Please comment on the current FA-Team proposals. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 16:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for your participation in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Twin Peaks episodes. The article was promoted to a featured list. Cheers! (SUDUSER)₈₅ 04:45, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Invite?

Hi there, Gary King! I would like to invite you to WikiProject 24, the WikiProject related to all 24 articles. I have seen that you have been helping out on a 24 article, so thought you might like to join the WikiProject. If you would like to join, then please click here and add yourself to our list of participants. Thanks and have a nice day! Steve Crossin (contact) 06:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't get to give these templates out often :). Steve Crossin (contact) 06:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I decided to just point people to my contact page instead :). Well, I hope you can help out anyway :). Thanks again. Steve Crossin (contact) 07:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes, I have a sekret agenda ;). I have big plans for the project, and I expect it will become active again in 2009, when Season 7 comes out. I hope to have the project fully ready by then. But basically, the main main characters I hope to get to FA status, as well as the 24 (TV series) article. The other characters, such as Martha Logan, to GA status, and the rest to B class. I'm working on a Manual of Style for the project, as well as maybe a notability guideline, which was mentioned in the previous Mediation Cabal case. You think you could help out there? And we need moar sources. Right now I'm working on Bill Buchanan (24 character). I have the best job ever, I get to watch 24 and call it research :D. Steve Crossin (contact) 07:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, force of habit :). Steve Crossin (contact) 07:11, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

FAC:Noble gas

You said it passed the fac recently? Where? Nergaal (talk) 08:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I promoted it hours ago but GimmeBot can't run because of server delays. Congratulations, and sorry for the delay! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Apple acquisitions

Hi Gary, the list is now ten days at FLC, can you work it out with WackyMacs as to whether it's now comprehensive and give me a shout? Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:11, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, while I posted this, Wackymacs reaffirmed his oppose. I'm going to withdraw the nomination and let you work on it offline. But do bring it back to FLC in the near future, once you're sure you've dealt with Wackymac's concerns. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:13, 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) 18:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim managers

Done and done. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 20:23, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Unibomber

Sure, I'd be "happy" to review the article. I just hope it doesn't "kill" my day. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Didn't curiosity kill the cat? I'm just kidding. ;) Put it up and tell me. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Heads up: There's some stuff in the lead that aren't linked. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Cool, then. I'm almost done with the review. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, its long. But, I guess its suppose to be long, since the guy did become famous for bombing stuff. I wouldn't know what section to cut down, since all that info. seems to be important to be included in the article. What do you think should be cut down? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you think that section is important? Honestly, I would take examples from other crime-related GA's like Matthew Cox and the Zodiac Killer. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that section is important. Oh, well I was just saying. ;) I really thought the Zodiac Killer would interest you in someway, apparently not. How 'bout John Wilkes Booth? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, somehow I guessed you've seen it. ;) Are you gonna try to get the Zodiac Killer to FA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Very true. Any other articles that are crime-related that you're interested in? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Nice. Maybe a break is good for you. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Congrats, you have a GA in your midst. ;) Dang, you are busy. I still say a break should be good for you. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Aww, then your capitalizing on your "free" time. I so respect you. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm continuing the conversation in the same section. ;) Actually, I thought the table was an excellent idea brought to the article. It works fine, instead of having a column list. Yeah, I think the Injuries column isn't really necessary, unless the injuries aren't mentioned in the article, then it should be kept. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your GA nomination of Rogers Morton

Hello there. I believe I addressed both of your issues with the article. Thanks for the input. --Tom (talk - email) 23:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't too certain. Thanks again for your time reviewing the article, though! --Tom (talk - email) 00:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium)/archive1 ... Question

Hi GK,

I was wondering if you can take a quick look at your comments in the above article promotion page. Considering that all of them have been addressed, can you please help supporting or denying this promotion?

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 07:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Noble gas

Hey, congratulations on successfully bringing that article to FA. Nice work. Avruch 14:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks, much appreciated. :) And thanks for the advice. I've created temp-talk pages to use if necessary, and the top talk page I've left for the time being. It's at AN/I now so that'll be a forum for the discussion. Ah well, see how it goes. Thanks again! Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 16:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Lost

I got one and will be reviewing shortly. I have an article if you're interested. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Quick question: If "Meet Kevin Johnson" and "The Shape of Things to Come" are episodes, shouldn't they have quotation marks? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright, just checking. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Perfect Competition

I have considerably edited the Perfect Competition entry, adding many references and clarifying parts that had been singled out as unclear. But I am inexperienced and I do not know how one goes about eliminating the warnings that may have become outdated. I feel that the warning that the article needs more citations, and the warning that the article may have parts that are confusing or unclear, may be now outdated. But how is a decision about this reached? Mimuli (talk) 20:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Introduction to virus

Gary, Hi, congratulations on Noble gas. Do you have the time to take another look at the virus article now, and your observations at its FAC? Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 21:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Trenton

I nominated this article for GA status. I'm a little confused with the WP:CITE/ES. Along with there being a disputed tag up top, I can't really understand what it wants me to do. Could you please give me an example of how I should reference it? Thanks. Red4tribe (talk) 22:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Los Angeles Lakers first and second round draft picks

Done! Annoyomous24 (talk) 00:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium) made it to Featured List!

Hi there,

I just wanted to say thanks for your contribution (directly or indirectly) to have the previous article in Wikipedia, now listed as a Featured List. This will be the first of a set of articles with similar topics for several countries of the Eurozone. The BEHAG is to reach a Featured Topic.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 01:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:RfA

Ironic, I'm planning for vacation around that time. I don't know about my activity level on Wikipedia after I start attending my new school, but I should still have a fair bit of time to throw around. And yeah, I haven't really "coached" you in the formal sense that others have (sub-pages on coaching, constant evaluation, craploads of potential RfA questions), and I even said myself that my "coaching" would be a very hands-off process. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. In terms of content contributions though, you have more than I did when I went to RfA (I had one featured article, two featured topics, twenty-six featured lists, five good articles then), and I think it's a bit of a moot point in that regard. That said, the more contributions the better. And yes, RfA is the equivalent of Wikipedia hell right now, so it's completely up to you when and if you want to run again. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but my point is that your content contributions (three featured articles, three featured topics, eleven featured lists, thirty-six good articles, and plainly ridiculous amounts of good article reviews and created articles) are so large that it becomes a moot point. As for vandal fighting, I think any consistent Huggle user passes at RfA as a vandal fighter, and you definitely qualify. And do remember that at your last RfA, Sandy and Tony opposed because you were placing supports on seven or so nominations at one time without paying attention to the articles in question. You still go fast, but now it's with comments, and you're slowing down as you go. That and you've spent the last couple of months ingratiating yourself to both of them, so I don't think they're going to oppose you. For what's it worth, you've received support for a future nomination from Giggy (who has as much content contributions as either of us) and The Rambling Man (who is a 'crat and a FL director), so you're moving in the right direction in terms of content areas. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The big thing that the RfA regulars look for between RfAs is a willingness to admit mistakes and learn from constructive criticism, which you've largely been doing for the past few months. As for your desire to place yourself as a template editor --> content contributor --> vandal fighter, that's a pretty solid way to go. Your answer to question one is basically how you dictate that theme, and question two is where you back it up with tangible contributions. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:46, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal/AndonicO.

Should be done within the next half hour; note Template:Construction at the top. ;) · AndonicO ^Engage. 02:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Done... sortof. · AndonicO ^Engage. 02:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The Black Parade GA Nomination

I have made the changes that you specified. I was wondering about that red linked date. I made it December 2006 as it says that is the date it is published, should it be formatted another way?  Orfen  ^T • _C 04:46, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

NIN FTC

Patience dude! Drewcifer (talk) 05:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

List of anthems by country

Gary, time's up on this one. You've got quite a few comments outstanding now (courtesy of me and Dweller) - do you think you can fix them up in the next day or so, or should I archive the current FLC so you can work on it offline and return again in the near future? If I don't hear from you by this time tomorrow I'll assume the latter. No offence, naturally, just need to keep on top the FLC backlog! Cheers for now. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, well I thought when the backlog notice contained almost half the total number of lists, we were in trouble, so I'm trying to clear it at least once every two days, and trying to look further ahead to get reviewers to return to reviews they made without committing a support/oppose. On that note...List of Green Bay Packers in the Pro Football Hall of Fame could use an opinion and List of Major League Baseball players from Puerto Rico could use your reviewing eyes... once you get a moment away from your anthems! Once again, keep up the good work... The Rambling Man (talk)

Re: References for The Simpsons episode articles

We have a few books that source basic information or provide analysis. The DVD commentary is the main source, and Newsbank is always good. Searches for reviews from IGN, Entertainment Weekly and other such sites also help. Gran² 07:13, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

There's an entire book of essays about the first season of the show. Chris Turner's Planet Simpson has some in-depth analysis of certain episodes and characters, as do books like this and this. Most of the production info will have to come from the DVD commentaries, although you can sometimes find additional behind-the-scenes info from interviews with guest stars. I know that John Updike, for example, has discussed his experiences on the show. Zagalejo^^^ 23:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

cite web

Gary—it all looks very complicated. I thought you proposed programming was a fairly simple addition to users' options. Tony (talk) 09:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, now there are complications about whether David is going to enable cite web just to force one format or another. I though dates would end up unformatted, typed in manually as in the main text, and black. Perhaps you could provide feedback. You know how development requests can fail through complications and fuzz. Tony (talk) 14:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

So does this mean we still get the "sea of blue" in citations lists? Looks like it. I was hoping for the manual keying in of just the dates. Tony (talk) 01:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Office references

• Mastrchf gave me this link whcih is pretty helpful.
• Sometimes OfficeTally.com has good links to interviews and behind the scenes stuff
• I usually would Google something like "Goodbye, Toby The Office review"

Hope that helps. --Mr.crabby (Talk) 12:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

That first link that crabby listed is one I use, it's good for lead and production info. And IGN, Entertainment Weekly, and BuddyTV almost always do reviews, so I search through those sites usually. If I'm really lacking, I'll go to the commentary track of the DVD. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 15:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

When you get the chance, check back on the GA review for Gay Witch Hunt. Thanks! --Mr.crabby (Talk) 17:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I prefer text references also. Verifiability and ease of access in the text refs always exceeds that of the audio. But, when production information is lacking, it's a good way to find a couple of tidbits. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 20:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU, Status, and you!

As you may know, the StatusBot responsible for maintaining the status of the Highly Active Users was taken offline. We now have a replacement in the Qui status system. This semi-automatic system will allow you to easily update your status page found at Special:Mypage/Status which the HAU page code is now designed to read from. If you are already using Qui (or a compatible system) - great! - no action is needed (other than remembering to update your status as necessary). If not, consider installing Qui. You can also manually update this status by changing the page text to online, offline, or busy. While it is not mandatory, the nature of HAU is that people are often seeking a quick answer from someone who is online and keeping our statuses up-to-date will assist with this. Note if you were previously using your /Status page as something other than a one-word status indicator, your HAU entry may have been set to "status=n" to correct display issues. Please clear this parameter if you change things to be "HAU compatible". Further questions can be raised at WT:HAU. This message was delivered by xenobot 22:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The traditional rfa thank you message

		Thank you for the support!
		Gary/Archives, 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) 03:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Ref label

Hi Gary. I have to say I'm more familiar with Ref labels (the tallest building FLs all seem to use those, as does the one Orlady pointed to) and I find them less confusing then the footnotes which use numbers. It doesn't seem like a major change, so my advice would be to switch over to the ref labels...! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Struway2 has now weighed in with a load of comments. I'll probably archive the FLC tomorrow morning unless more support is forthcoming - you can always restart the nom again as soon as you've dealt with the comments, hope you understand. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

cite web sandbox

I see you've just edited teh sand box, so might still be online. If user has no preferences set (as I currently have) then the empty/blank datestyle examples in the sandbox are redlink single entries as: 2008-01-01

I sought help from User talk:Davidgothberg, but if you can see where I went wrong do tell :-) David Ruben ^Talk 18:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Cite web: dates that do not contain links

Hi,

I appreciate your work on cite web. The aim of 'lk=off' was to eliminate enforced date links. I thought that the simplest method was to stop reformatting the raw text and move us back towards the color/colour solution where users tolerate raw text. I still believe it is possible to achieve the aim of eliminating enforced date links. What is the best method for achieving that? Regards Lightmouse (talk) 21:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Easy enough to eliminated wikilinked dates for all readers - just code as {{{date|}}} for unlinked black-text; and the parameter just takes free text of whatever the editor chooses (I for one really don't need to see wikilinked blue year for 2008, I think I'm orientated in time and place).

The problem is if we still wish registered users, who have set a date preference, to see dates formated according to their choice; for this one must set the date parameter value into a form that can be converted into the readers prefered style, and that seems to mean a fixed YYYY-MM-DD input format, which few seem happy to see directly.

• Current wikilinking leads to a dual situation - those who have declared a preference may have it and other readers see YYYY MM-DD
• The current {{cite web/sandbox}} (if we can get it to work properly) would lead to triple situation - those who have declared a preference may have it, for everyone else either the status quo linked YYYY MM-DD or an editor-selected fixed unlinked black-text style.

As wikimedia provides no direct access to a user's preferences (i.e. no open variables for reading), if we wish to depreciate users having their own declared date preference within articles, then no problem and soooo much easier to code as just unformated editor-selected free text :-) ...but I suspect there would be a chorus of disapproval ? David Ruben ^Talk 22:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The ISO format of yyyy-mm-dd is like the curious incident of the dog in the night-time i.e. you would expect complaints but they do not appear. Most readers see ISO. It is only when you ask people to express a preference, they choose something else.

I do not think we should be afraid of offering ISO as the unlinked option, at least at one point in transition to unlinked dates. Here is a thought that has just occured to me:

• Create a 'lk=dmy', 'lk=mdy' option and roll it out by bot to accessdate
• Then make any instances of accessdate simply show the raw text. Thus all references with yyyy-mm-dd in the code and without 'lk=dmy' would be seen as yyyy-mm-dd.
• Then instead of using 'lk=dmy', permit users to have whatever date text they want. This would allow them to match the format of the article and the references. They can write 'January 25' if they want and add links if they want i.e. the date is just plain text that is presented exactly as written.

The parameter does not have to be 'lk=' if that is not nice. Lightmouse (talk) 23:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair points. If you just want just an on/off swicth then "datelink" might be more obvious as a parameter name, and allow it to take just one possible value of "|datelink=off" (anything else leaves current status quo). Interim measure will get shouted at, not for accessdate so much as that is as per current display, but if formating options also applied to "date" & "archivedate" too (as sandbox currently tries to do).

Hence: Smith, Fred (2007-12-05) "Recent developements in X" webpub. Retrieved on 2008-07-08

looks really odd with its ISO date ? David Ruben ^Talk 02:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

If "|datelink=off" will achieve the aim of showing the raw unformatted text, that is fine by me. The ISO date is what most users aleady see. Lightmouse (talk) 13:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Busi-ness

Yes, I have. I so need a break. I'm sorry to hear that your computer crashed on you. But, good to have you back, I hope. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Buh, Buh, Buh, Barnstar'd

I don't give out B-stars lightly, but you sir, deserve it.

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For an insane amount of GA reviews and contributions to a repletion of FLs, GAs, FAs, and simply making the world a better place. Blackngold29 06:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, thanks Gary King (talk) 06:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

A favor

Hey Gary. The article Night Out is currently up as a FAC, but it has been requested that it be copy-edited. Since we've added a good deal of information since your last review, User:Mr.crabby and I were wondering if you'd give the article a quick look through and see if you can find any problems with it. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 15:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

main page redesign

Hi, I saw your comments over on main page redesign proposal and was hoping that you could take a look at my proposal and give me some feedback.--88wolfmaster (talk) 21:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The Greencards FAC follow up

Hi! You weighed in on the The Greencards FAC previously, here. I'm fairly sure I've gotten I believe all the FAC suggestions remedied, and began a peer review as well. Would you mind taking another glance and letting me know on the peer review or my talk what else may need doing, before I go back to FAC? Thank you! rootology (T) 03:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Cite book suggestion

In the talk page for the Cite book template you suggested adding this code:

| ({{#ifeq:{{#time:Y-m-d|{{{date}}}}}|{{{date}}}|[[{{{date}}}]]|{{#ifeq:{{#time:Y-m-d|{{{date}}}}}|1970-01-01|[[{{{date}}}]]|{{{date}}}}}}})

I have no idea how that works, but I am curious why the date 1970-01-01 was chosen? --Gerry Ashton (talk) 03:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I see that #time is a parser function which is limited to the range of valid Unix times. Of course, this is not suitable for use with the date parameter of Cite templates, since many cited works were written before 1970. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 12:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Phan Dinh Phung

Your request has been attended to at FAC. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Toyohara Kunichika GA nomination

I have made extensive updates. I am waiting for a permission for a section discussing signatures, but that is something I can do in the future. I would say the article is now ready for GA review. Thank you for everyone's patience and assistance. --clhowson (talk) 00:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

---

• All references had and have publishers.
• All image dates have been fixed.
• I seem to be having a problem with disappearing images.

--clhowson (talk) 13:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Web citations have been fixed. My images have suddenly reappeared. I consider the article good to go. --clhowson (talk) 15:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Please use em dashes for year ranges, like in "(1841-1898)", per WP:DASH. Gary King (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Now that I have done this, I find that the page you referred me to says:

Year ranges, like all ranges, are separated by an en dash (do not use a hyphen or slash (2005–08, not 2005-08 or 2005/08). A closing CE-AD year is normally written with two digits (1881–86) unless it is in a different century from that of the opening year (1881–1986). --clhowson (talk) 14:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, my mistake; it was late at night for me. Gary King (talk) 19:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'm game. What next?

--clhowson (talk) 21:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Gary. Next?

--clhowson (talk) 19:28, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for this. It was boggling my mind how to fix it and not make it look as awkward. :) By the way. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, it was a rather useful edit! :D Ottava Rima (talk) 18:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, initially it was just like that. However, it was changed to get rid of the "date template" based on a recent move in Wikipedia to start removing them from articles. Perhaps it can be shrunk with the "small" code, before and after, manually. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thats exactly what I meant. :D Ottava Rima (talk) 18:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

All of the books that are used now should have authors. That "----." is scholarly short hand for "written by the guy above". It just makes it easier to lump multiple books by the same author together while glancing through. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Much better; thanks Gary! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Sweeney Todd for GA status

Thanks for listing Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007 film) as a Good Article, I was rather inactive over the past few days, so I thank you for being patient with us while we addressed the concerns. Cheers! —Mizu onna sango15/^Discuss 01:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Claus Luthe

Thanks for the quick review. A question I have regarding citations ... there are many styles that are acceptable in Wikipedia, and I have chosen what I think is a fairly common footnote style. Assuming this style is OK, how should enter subsequent references to the same source? Wikipedia:CITE doesn't seem to tell me that. Thanks! -- Tomh009 (talk) 14:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Tomh009 (talk) 18:27, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of best-selling albums in the United States

Hey, Sorry about that, haven't been there in a while. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 21:04, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

NY Route 22 FAC

Could you take another look? I solved your comment.Mitch32^(UP) 22:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

My RFA Thanks

Thank you for your support at my RFA, which closed a couple of hours back as a success. I shall try and remain in your eyes as a dedicated editor, and I will get around to being that once I have finished all my RFA Thank You letters. You know, it is times like this I am glad that I didn't make it into the WP:100 club... Seriously though, your support means a lot to me, and I look forward to working with you in the future. StephenBuxton (talk) 22:56, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It's none of my business, but....

Can you help with this? A little birdy said you might be able to.Ferrylodge (talk) 00:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

NG-Gamer

Hey Gary, Can you check out that article?. It seems it should be deleted due to notability. --SkyWalker (talk) 03:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you know how to find them?. --SkyWalker (talk) 03:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Neither do i speak in dutch. Google news shows nothing about NG-Gamer. --SkyWalker (talk) 05:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

That seems the only option that exist. Also i was wondering why can't movie soundtrack have a separate article?. --SkyWalker (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Well Wall-E had a separate article until a user merged to the main article. Iam thinking of splitting it once again. What should i do?. --SkyWalker (talk) 05:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Check here.--SkyWalker (talk) 05:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

There are many short article such has those. How come those were not merged. Why iam the only unlucky one. :(--SkyWalker (talk) 06:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I will try. That is the first article that is happening. Kinda getting frustrated and annoyed. --SkyWalker (talk) 06:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

India House FAC

Hello Garyg, thanks for your comments at the India House FAC, I have left comments on the FAC on the points you raise , please have a look. rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 13:30, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

WWE No Way Out

Is it ready for FL?--S_RX 02:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok I increased the font size, and removed the column colons. Also, there isn't enough info to warrant it as an article, look at Royal Rumble, its an FL and has alot of content.--S_RX 02:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok, thanks, I nominated it for FLC, here.--S_RX 19:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Batman Begins

Gary, I am so sorry I had to revert all your edits, but please see WP:MOSDATE and please do not listen to that ignorant peer reviewer. Of course Superhero Hype! is reliable, while independent sites like them are unreliable for rumours and stuff of course they can be trusted with interviews, press releases and set visits. Alientraveller (talk) 11:40, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Something I'd suggest is to use accessdate rather than days and years attributes. It takes up less space. Alientraveller (talk) 12:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

[Gives a virtual hug] Yeah, that was terrific! At least no one will step on me when I implement some of SHH's interviews conducted in 2005. Alientraveller (talk) 19:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Sarcasm, no, I genuinely appreciate your work and I know you appreciate mine. Alientraveller (talk) 19:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Themes should be expanded, not deleted. I went through hell for not writing one for E.T. Alientraveller (talk) 19:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

List of voice actors in the Grand Theft Auto series FLC

Hi, just to let you know, I have addressed the issues you raised at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of voice actors in the Grand Theft Auto series. Cheers, Dbam ^Talk/_{Contributions} 17:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Oops!

Sorry about that. I haven't made it live yet, so I'll just silently unlink it =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 21:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

New contribution: Biography of Italian mathematician Tortolini

Hi, I just finished a new article and would like to get it published on Wiki. All copyright issues are cleared. Would you please consider this? I think it is a good contribution. Rachel Tortolini (talk) 23:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson as gay icon

I fixed the two issues you addressed. It that it for the review? The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Lev Chernyi GA review

Yo Gary, I have responded to your GA review of the Lev Chernyi article here. I am wondering whether the review exhausts your concerns with your article, or you are planning on adding more later? I ask because I may not be around to address concerns raised after today, and am anxious to get the article into shape while I am still available to do so :). Regards, Skomorokh 02:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Admin coaching

I honestly don't know why I joined the program in the first place. I remember putting my name down in the list of volunteers one day, and I got a message a couple weeks later announcing an overhaul of the process. Shortly after that, I got that message on my talk page from you, and thought, "Hell, why not." My extra coaching position is actually a bit misleading, as I probably don't have the time for it, and it's only there because I stopped my coaching with User:Vivio Testarossa (who didn't really take any of my advice at all and failed his third RfA about a month after I stopped coaching him). I think after coaching you, I've figured out that my "coaching" more or less consists of me pointing the coachee in a general direction, the coachee figuring everything out for themselves and turning to me when they meet a snag. Trying to force people into working into admin areas doesn't really work if they're simply not good at it. All it takes is a couple of bad reports/taggings/etc. and your RfA goes down the drain. So long as the coachee finds their area of comfort, works well in it, and ensures that the tools have some relevance to working in that area, then it's all good. I also think any prospective coachees would probably have to be decent article contributors (as in they have pieces of featured content), as I think that's where my comfort zone for coachees is. User:ThinkBlue fits into that a bit, but I might look around some more.

Oh, and you're visiting Los Angeles? Cool, I live in Orange County, about an hour away. Don't bring any long-sleeved shirts, pants, or anything like that or you'll bake. Oh, and definitely find an In-N-Out Burger to try. Superior to McDonald's in every fashion possible :p Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Antarctic matters

Thank you for your GA review on Aurora's drift, also for your FAC support on Ernest Joyce. Brianboulton (talk) 09:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Break

Well, I'm glad you took your break, I need to take mine pretty soon. Yup, its pretty much the same way when you left, no major changes. Except, the new MoS of linking dates. Who knew, right? Wow, people do want your help on everything, dang, its like they come to you for some type of knowledge. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I have time, but don't expect the review anytime soon. This weekend is what I mean. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I was lying, I'll have the review done by today. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:42, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I was suppose to do something today, but ended up not doing it. Oh well. I know, I just saw the WP:GAN page and your in the list with a whole "bunch" of nominations. But, I'll have Devil May Cry done by today. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Should I be worried that dates are linked in the article? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright, just wanted to check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

You're so funny. ;) Congrats. Dang, you really want BB to be FA. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree, Batman Begins should be FA. Its getting there, since you are working on it with other people. ;) Well, if you see the Dark Knight, I'm pretty sure you'll get to the article and make sure that its GA stuff. Yup yup, TDK will be my fav. movie and will be the best movie of all time. You interested in the game? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The game is challenging. Um, I believe when a movie is good, is because of the acting and because of the cast. But, the reason the film is/will [be] great is because it has the Joker. ;) IDK, you may not agree. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

True, from your POV. :P But, you gotta realize that Scarecrow and Ra's are not popular Batman villains. The film is great, but TDK will top it. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sorry I forgot you mentioned that. My bad. But yeah, we both agree that TDK will be good. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I know, I was really panning that it pass that mark, but I guess people were skeptical, since the last Batman film. But, TDK will surpass that mark and be bigger than the Spider-Man film series. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Vithoba GA review

Thanks for review. I have addressed to the issues.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the promotion.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Business School (The Office)

Gary, I've made the requested changes in the article. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 20:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

GAN: Madame Tussauds Hong Kong

Thank you for your review earlier. Pse refer to my reply here. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 01:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of St. Louis Rams first-round draft picks

I have answered all your comment for List of St. Louis Rams first-round draft picks Gman124 ^talk 01:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Tai chi chuan

Greetings. Your new version of the family tree looks much, much better, IMO. I like your idea for trying for GA again. My time to devote to WP has been curtailed recently by extremely nice weather where I live (a relatively rare occurence) but I'd like to help as much as I can. Cheers! --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 01:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The Daily Show

Thanks so much for taking the time to review the article. I've made the changes you requested. Cheers, --Shoemoney2night (talk) 03:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Date PITA

Gary, can you spell this out for me in baby steps, to be sure I get it? Did something already change in the templates? Looking at History of the National Hockey League (1917–1942), the dates and accessdates are entered in ISO format, but whether logged in or out (that is, independent of my date prefs), I see them all as Day Month Year.

Except: this one, which I had to hardwire to agree with the others. (Got it wrong the first time, and had to re-do it.)

1) Has something already been implemented, 2) does it default to Day Month Year, and 3) is there a reason it handles older dates differently?

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

ah, so that's what citation does by default? (Gary, I'll follow your talk so the conversation isn't split.) Since it's not "my" article, I didn't realize that was the difference; was just checking FACs. I hate citation as well, but it's still a strange default, and why is the older date handled differently? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Indeed a strange default, which is why I don't like it; also, don't like it because it's missing a period. As for the older date, any dates older than 1970-01-01 will not format because of a technical limitation (Unix time for more info). Gary King (talk) 05:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, makes sense now. Thanks, Gary. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

List of voice actors in the Grand Theft Auto series

Gary, if you have a moment, could you offer a support/oppose to this FLC on which you commented a while ago? Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 06:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank spam...

... since you don't hate it!

		Thank you for the !vote!
		Gary/Archives, Thank you for participating in my RFA, which was approved! If you supported, thank you for your trust, consideration and support. If you opposed, I still thank you, and hope that over time I will be able to prove my worth. And finally, if you were neutral, thank you too. At least it wasn't an oppose! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Huggle

OMG, this thing rocks. I can't believe I once used WP:Lupin and WP:TW for watching recent changes :p Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I see. I just revert them. Oftentimes, they just leave a long personal attack that leads to them getting blocked after that :p Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

King's School, Ely

Thanks for your in depth review. I have begun to correct some of the issues, is it 14 days before a GA nomination can take place again? Cheers rocketman89 (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I don't plan on putting it back in again til its really ready, I don't like the kickback feeling! :-p. Is it perhaps ok if I give you a holla when I feel it could do with another pre GA review in the future? rocketman89 (talk) 19:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Just wandered what your opinion is on King's Monastic buildings? Do you think it should remain a list or go into prose? I prefer prose because it looks disjointed, but don't want to ruin the information that is there... cheers rocketman89 (talk) 21:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Right I've prosed this baby up and lengthened the lead, since I heard that the thing that all the cool cats are doing is basically summing up everything that is going to be in the article; I think the only problem now that might exist is the style of the references, but could you maybe give me some pointers on what style I should be doing? thanks so much if you can help! rocketman89 (talk) 22:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• Insufficient references per WP:CITE. Information that should be cited include:

• • " Curriculum" section
  • " Scholars" section
  • First paragraph of "The Hoop Trundle"
  • First half of "Boarding Houses"
  • "Day Houses" section
  • "King's Acremont" section
  • "International Study Centre" section
• Format references per WP:CITE/ES
• Ensure layout is correct per WP:LAYOUT; for instance, "See also" goes before "References"

Hi Gary, some other editors and I have had a good crack at all the issues you have raised, and I think it really is ready now, but I was wondering if you could give it a looksie before I nominate it is nominated again?

Many thanks for your help in advance! rocketman89 (talk) 22:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

11th Airborne Division A-Class

Hey there. I was wondering if you'd like to look at the A-Class Review for 11th Airborne Division and help me improve the article, since you were a real help with getting Operation Varsity to FA-Class. It's this link:[17], but I can't figure out how to link it smart-like. Cheers! Skinny87 (talk) 16:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers Gary. I have the 82nd on my worklist, but I'm finding actually working on wikipedia, ie writing and such, quite hard at the moment- mental block and so forth. When we do collaborate, how would we divide the article up? I have to admit, past WWII my military history isn't brilliant. Skinny87 (talk) 16:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

GA review of Robert Sterling Yard

Hi, Gary, thank you for reviewing and passing Robert Sterling Yard for GA. Your review was quite, er, brief, and as a result I'm seeking further feedback. :) Did you happen to have any thoughts or suggestions regarding the article's status/completeness? Did anything concern you while reading it? I've listed it at peer review with the hopes of nominating it at FAC in the future, so any comments would be helpful. Thanks, María (habla conmigo) 17:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for your time. María (habla conmigo) 17:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

What now? Review of Harvey Littleton

Hi Gary King:

Thank you for reviewing my expanded article on Harvey Littleton a couple weeks ago. I am trying to get a "Good Article" rating for it. I responded to your comments by adding many more references and having the article copy-edited, etc.

I note that someone has given the article a "C" grade (pretty discouraging), but left no comments for improvement or reason for the grade. What do I do now and how do I do it?

Sincerely, Glassnote (talk) 20:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank you

		Thank you!
		Gary/Archives, it is with deep awareness of the responsibility conferred by your trust that I am honored to report that in part to your support, my request for adminship passed (87/14/6). I deeply value the trust you and the Wikipedia community have in me, and I will embark on a new segment of my Wikipedia career by putting my new tools to work to benefit the entire community. My best to you, Happyme22 (talk) 03:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Bayern Munich GA review

Hi Gary!

Thanks for your review on the FC Bayern Munich article. I think I have adressed your concerns. But before I resubmit the article, can you please have glance at the article and tell whether you think so, too? Thank you. OdinFK (talk) 07:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

re: Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses)

Absolutely—thanks for asking. --Laser brain (talk) 20:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It may be notable to add info about Voliminal: Inside the Nine. Some footage on it was recorded during the making of Vol. 3, there's more in the article. Good work on the article! Blackngold29 20:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I will check that out. Gary King (talk) 20:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks. Blackngold29 22:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Gary, I'm a bit confused - I saw the open peer review but did you just open an FAC for it as well? I'm not sure if that was a mistake but I recommend letting the peer review run for a while before taking it to FAC. I think the peer review needs to be archived before listing at FAC as well. Did you want me to peer review it or... ? --Laser brain (talk) 22:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Isn't it if there is only one word quoted, then the period goes outside. But if it's multiple words, then it's inside? Blackngold29 19:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

colwidth

Hey, I was wondering, what improvement does this edit make? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot FLC

Hey, I thought that due to your experience in FLCs and having some background on Slipknot, that you comment on Slipknot band members. Comments are being taken here. Thank you! Blackngold29 18:31, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The Convention (The Office)

I think this looks good/is ready for GA. RedThunder 18:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Huggle

It's simply so superior to previous methods of watching recent changes that it's addicting. It's easy to see how people accumulate a couple thousand edits with this, and the interface is pretty intuitive. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 21:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep on rambling...

...you got it! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Charlie Sheen On Hold

Hi Gary, I've edited the Charlie Sheen page up to your guidelines. Could you please review it again?

Thank you very much, Music2611 (talk) 11:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 90 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. All the best, Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 20:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

greasemonkey auto-status

I think the idea still has merit. the reason the statusbot's got blocked was because they were updating people's status far too much. 15 minutes of no editing - offline. edit again? online. then 15 minutes of no editing - offline. and they updated the last edit time whenever you went offline. so you can imagine, unless you edit at least once every 15 minutes they might update your status 50 times a day! if you can find someone to write the greasemonkey script (which would only change your status once as you ran your browser - right?) then let me know. (P.S. I see you split your archives... I hate to say I told you so... ;>) –xeno (talk) 12:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Manual statusing is working ok for me for now, so I'd be more inclined to try and find someone to write this script I proposed here: WT:WikiProject User scripts#Script suggestion. –xeno (talk) 22:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Welcome

Thank you for the kind welcome. It really made my day! Hamako 16:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: RELOADED AfD

Hmm, appears to be moot now - the article was speedied per A7. But I'm sure you'd be able to rewrite the article if you like - I'll happily email you a copy of the old text. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that, should really have looked through the history first. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 20:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Preloaded text in FAC

Hello, I would like to ask you what make the preloaded text in a new FA nomination appear. On Template:FAC/editintro I can't see this text anywhere, and I would like to know where it comes from. This is the text I'm talking about:

===[[{{subst:SUBPAGENAME}}]]===

:<small>''Nominator(s): ~~~''</small>
<noinclude>{{Wikipedia:Featured article tools|1={{subst:SUBPAGENAMEE}}}}</noinclude>
<!-- Please don't edit anything above here; just include your reasons for nominating below. -->

I'm nominating this article for featured article because...  ~~~~

diego_pmc (talk) 20:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Linkin Park awards

Jeez! At least give me some time! :P I call the lead. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 02:35, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

You want to go ahead and do the copyedit and the refs? I, unfortunately have to go at the moment. (I'll remove the nom for now) « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 03:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Doc pages

Yep I am aware of that. I put the cat on the main page because I've had many many cases where putting it onto the doc page doesn't put the cat on the main page. It's actually more often than not, surprisingly. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 05:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

That could be. Or it could just be pages that aren't setup quite right. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 05:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Period 1 element

Well, due to the fact that I took Chemistry my junior year in high school, I'm sorta familiar with it. Um, to be honest, I would look at other example GA's, if there are any. I think summarizing would be the way to go. IDK, I don't think I'm the right person to ask about this. :( --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It may seem to be like a list or something, IDK. I know your asking me as a fellow GA reviewer, I do the same, but you say and I quote "that's not your forte." ;) Haha, Cobb salad? What about Caesar salad? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, impressive. Do you think it might be GA material? Caesar salad, easy? Okay, how 'bout Chicken salad? ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, people have more interests in other stuff and I don't think they realize Food as a good topic to write about. But, you have your eye on Cobb salad, so who knows. You might start a "thing". ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I just read through it and it seems fine. I don't think you'll have much problem with it. Unless, you want a certain someone to review it. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'd love to review it. ;) The reason I haven't touched Wall-e and Hancock is because I haven't seen them and I don't want to be "spoiled". You can understand that, right? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 04:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I might see Wall-e tomorrow and yeah I heard that Hancock was not good at all, but still you know. ;) Don't expect the review..... right now. I gotta log off and time to see my show. :p --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 04:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Aw, I see you have Batman and Robin in mind. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

They've probably haven't read the comics/graphic novels to realize that Batman is suppose to be dark. Yeah, I did some work on the article, but gave up, since writing a lead for a film does seem complicated. Maybe if another Batman film gets help to get to FA. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

In that case, I'd better get my DVD's ready and try to see if I can add anything to the article. Good news, Heath Ledger's article is un-lockable, if you know what I mean. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Cool then. Yeah, I'll check them out. If you're not busy or whatever, I have one up, that's if you're not busy. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I don't want to stress you, so after I'm done reviewing Arcade Fire and then when your done with your FL, I'll review Hancock. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Nah, I was informed more that the film is not worth it, so, why waste time to see something that's not good. Unlike at midnight tonight. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that's..... alright, I guess. ;) Midnight tonight, I'm watching it. Don't worry, I won't spoil anything for you. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Nice, I'm doing the same, only that I'm watching Batman: Gotham Knight. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the look is very weird, but hey, is Batman and the scenarios are unbelievable. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I know what you mean, that's how I am when I'm watching B&R. I know, before BB came out I did some research on Christopher Nolan and I saw Memento and it sorta scared me, because of the story that was told, but the film was great. :p --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

TBH, I disliked Transformers. I think they hyped it up too much and that's what killed it. I know, I give props to Christopher Nolan and Jon Favreau for their work on the films. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I, saw it, four times. It, was good. Go, see it. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I am, I'm trying to work on other things, just like you. ;) Yup, after I'm done with, the one I'm working on, I'll work on Aaron Eackhart and maybe even Chris Nolan. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it four times, since midnight yesterday (or today). Hey, I'm a true Batman fan. :p --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Really? I'll check it out. Um, I still haven't seen Wall-e, but what the heck, I'll review it. :) And, I can't touch B&R, since I did some work on it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:49, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I got a movie pass and I can see the entire movie all day. That's why. :) Alright, I'll review Wall-e in a little while. But, its worth seeing and lives to its expectations. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:03, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Inquiry about sourcing on Chess boxing

Since you are responsible for reviewing it as a possible GA(although to be honest the more I look at the more I think it might make sense to withdraw that nomination and do it again in a week or two) I figured I'd bug you about one of the sources which I'm really not sure what to do with. One of the sources added earlier by someone is simply given as "SportsCenter Special: Chess Boxing. Aired on ESPN 5/7/07". I can clean it up, but I'm not sure it is enough information to really make it a full citation. Your thoughts? JoshuaZ (talk) 01:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I was unaware of that template. JoshuaZ (talk) 02:28, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, it looks to me like it is ready for review. JoshuaZ (talk) 19:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Spoilers

I don't really mind because at the end of the day I generally know the good guy wins and do get a good guess at plot structures. But I do avoid the plot section until I've seen it. I've taken TDK off my watchlist as there's apparently a plot controversy. Alientraveller (talk) 20:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Regarding WP:BOLDTITLE

I didn't know at FLC that boldface in the topic sentence was optional (is there anywhere that you can show me where it says boldface is optional). I was just going on the fact that WP:BOLDTITLE states that the "subject should be mentioned at the earliest natural point in the prose in the first sentence, and should appear in boldface." Reorion (talk) 03:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Vandalism

Yeah, I know. Perhaps that is a feature to ask for with Huggle: see recent changes for all the pages in your userpage :p Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 04:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Template:ArticleHistory

Hi, I saw you contributed quite a lot to the creation of the above mentioned template, and I would like you to help me undestand a few things, and how I can adapt it to the needs of a slightly different FA policy of another Wikipedia.

First tell me if i understood correctly: Template:Historyoutput is for producing the full name of the reviewing process, from given abbreviations, right?

On this other Wikipedia (the Romanian one), after a FAC, or FAR process, the page is immeditelly archived, and moved to Wikipedia:featured article candidates/ArticleName/Archive X, and the (now blank) Wikipedia:featured article candidates/ArticleName page is deleted. This is so that it would be easier for unexperienced users to create a new nomination, by using {{FAC}} template. This is done on WP:en too actually, but by bots.

Is there anyway to alter this code below, so that when I click on identified, I would be directed to the right page (Wikipedia:featured article candidates/ArticleName/Archive X, and not just Wikipedia:featured article candidates/ArticleName)? I though maybe this could be done either by creating a new parameter: currectstatuslink, but I don't know how to make the template use that instead of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}}.

Or simpler, it could be done by using actionXlink, where X is the number of the most current process that took place, which is extracted using the code below. But again, i don't know how to make the template use it. Please help me with this.

<td>[[Image:Featured article star.svg|{{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|30px|48px}}|Featured article star]]</td>
<td> '''{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}}''' is a [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|featured article]]; it (or a previous version of it) has been '''''[[{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action15|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action15link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action14|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action14link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action13|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action13link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action12|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action12link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action11|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action11link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action10|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action10link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action9|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action9link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action8|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action8link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action7|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action7link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action6|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action6link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action5|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action5link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action4|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action4link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action3|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action3link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action2|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action2link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action1|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action1link}}} |Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }}|identified]]''''' as one of the best articles produced by the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedia community]]. Even so, if you can update or improve it, [[Wikipedia:Be bold|please do so]].<includeonly>[[Category:Wikipedia featured articles|{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}}]]</includeonly></td></tr>

Also, can you tell me where to find these, so that I could translate them. I have used [Ctrl] + F for both {{ArticleHistory}}, and {{Historyoutput}}, and couldn't find them:

• Article milestones
• Process
• Result
• Date (also how can I modify the date format, so that it would show D,M,Y and not M,D,Y?) diego_pmc (talk) 08:35, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Message.

A message that never got to you. Cheers, · AndonicO ^Engage. 09:19, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Nuthatch

Gary, you were kind enough to comment on the Nuthatch article, which is now nearing the end of its FAC. The article has been extensively modified since your comments, and i wonder if you would be prepared to take another look? jimfbleak (talk) 12:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Old Peer review

Do we need the redirect at {{Old Peer review}}? Gimmetrow 16:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

So can it be deleted? There are redirects from {{oldpeerreview}} and {{old peer review}}. Gimmetrow 20:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Period 1 elements

You probably want to edit this once the FARC on Helium is done. Nergaal (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, as I've told you before, please list the chemical elements nominations to the WP:Elements talkpage. Nergaal (talk) 17:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

TDK

See, I told you it lived up to its expectations. ;) I know TDK will get some lovin'. :P The record now is six times. I gotta stop or I'll be out of money. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:21, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I know, I know. I won't see the film for a little while, I sorta have some Joker lines stuck with me. :P I hope you saw the film on IMAX. ;) I know, the first time I saw it, I was like forget you guys, where's the Joker, come back. :) It is great. Speaking of TDK, any thoughts on what the first Batman film can have for FA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright, alright chill. ;) Jeez. Wait, what about B&R? Hmmm? Oh, well you should see it on IMAX, its awesome. ;) How's the progress going with BB? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

That's good to hear about BB and TDK. ;) Still with the plans with Christian Bale? The experience is awesome, it feels like your actually in the scene where every sequence takes place, especially all the stuff that was blown up. I recommend that you see TDK on IMAX. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:FTC for DMC series

Hey. I was scanning the FA VG article external links checker here, and noticed that the 3 FA articles in the FTC, DMC series have dead external links. Game #1 and #2 have 3 dead external links each, while #3 has 2. Oddly, though, the two GA articles have no dead links. ([18]) Anyway, they should be fixed. --haha169 (talk) 01:00, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

FYI about Guitar Hero Featured Topic

I would double check which Guitar Hero games are currently released, since i think one or two of them may need to be added to that list, along with their list of songs. :) Amazing work on Final Fantasy III by the way, it is so nice to see that article at that level of quality, I did not think it would be done for a long, long time :) One final thing, the original Final Fantasy article and Final Fantasy II need to be greatly strengthened, along with Final Fantasy VII regaining GA/FA to have a topic that won't be in jeopardy (FFII gets no love!) Amazing work. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 02:58, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:User talk:AndonicO/Tzatziki Squad

Wow, I definitely read your comment wrong. I think I read sadness = cry...don't know why :/ Sorry bout that! But yeah, my main point was that improving any article improves the encyclopedia, and choosing one article as more important than another is a matter of opinion that is mainly based on an individual's belief on the subject. Sorry if I sounded harsh :|, I am just a contributor to such articles that could be considered by some as less important than others. But to me they are important and what I am passionate about, so I feel if I can improve my little corner of the Wiki, than others will hopefully be able to improve their corners, and hopefully one day everyone's little piece will come together to make one big, quality encyclopedia. Also, I sent you an email. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 03:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok first off Call of Duty 4 = Amazingness! ;) So Wikipedia is indebted to you for that one. And I understand, in hindsight, my comment wasn't the most productive, and for that I apologize. I just liked how the project wasn't choosing the regular articles to improve, and I liked the random choices made by each member in the sequence that they joined the project. And I do think that all the articles at WP:VITAL need to be improved and should be our best quality stuff. I just would rather see us go with how things have gone, where each member gets to choose the article to improve. And I also think fatal hilarity would make an amazing Main Page FA! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 03:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's how they choose the main collaboration, its based on the order of joining. See User talk:AndonicO/Tzatziki Squad#Next collaboration. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 03:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Backlog cleared at WP:RFPP. And I think things will pick up. The first FA was back when there were only 10-12 people in the group. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 05:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Death Cab

Hey, you up for some bringing-up-to-GA-standards-collaboration? :-) —Giggy 05:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Baman Series

On the Batman Begins article, you removed that Batman & Robin precedes it. However, though in a different universe, Batman & Robin is still the previous movie in the series. All other movie series articles that I've seen (such as the Bond movies, Friday the 13th movies, and Halloween movies) still count the previous movie as preceding the reboot. Ophois (talk) 04:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. I looked at the infobox template, and it says that those are for if the film is part of a series. Since it's a reboot, is a different series. Ophois (talk) 01:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you online ATM?

could you pop onto IRC for half an hour or so if you're free? TIA Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you on IRC? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I had to leave real quickly. :( Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Maryland state highways

If possible, can you take another look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of numbered highways in Maryland/archive1 to see if you have any more comments, or whether you can support/oppose/etc. it? Thanks. - Algorerhythms (talk) 16:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Batman Begins

Hi there. I'm glad you liked my edit. I have a habit of heavily editing articles. I'm sure I make mistakes from time to time, so feel free to revert any that you find unsuitable. Cheers. Imagine Reason (talk) 00:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh Gary, FF7, really? Is there no easier story for me to summarize? Imagine Reason (talk) 01:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Jokes aside, I'm not sure I agree with the current summary on the cause of Cloud's split personality. It was my understanding that his refusal to accept his low station caused him to repress certain memories and create new, fake ones, while Sephiroth let his rage take over and this, combined with Jenova's cells, was the cause for Sephiroth's evil deeds. Imagine Reason (talk) 01:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Featured Article Drive status

Hey Gary, I wanted to get your thoughts about the still-nominally-ongoing featured article drive of Adam Smith. It seems to be standing still, and I'm wondering if we should try to refocus WP:ECON on something smaller and more bite-sized. Maybe we could re-aim the Adam Smith effort at getting it to GA, or start talking up the article drive again... I'm not sure, but maybe you have some ideas. Above all I'm still interested in making WP:ECON more vibrant. Let me know, thanks. -FrankTobia (talk) 06:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

FLC

Glad you're a fan of List of The Killers awards. I was just stumbling through your contributions when I came across this. Since you have not added the nomination page to transclude on the list of candidates and bearing in mind the lacking lead section - did you actually endeavour to setup its candidacy or have I whooshed ahead of you? Apologies for any inconvenience if so - since you created that page and accordingly, through not much virtue of the imagination I assumed you forgot to add the {{flc}} template. WilliamH (talk) 14:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Since you created the candidacy page in question, I never believed I was nominating it - only a good faith assumption that you had forgotten to add the {{flc}} template on the relevant talk page. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 16:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I noticed. Best, WilliamH (talk) 17:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		For your tireless and efficient content contributions. You're making us all look like slackers! ;) Qst (talk) 15:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

PS, I've been thinking about working on some of those music award lists, too. Qst (talk) 15:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm

Well, I to be honest I would love to, but I really want to focus on the original Final Fantasy at the moment...I would be more than happy to help hunt for things that need to be cited, or copyediting though.. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

TDK

You should, the experience is pretty awesome. :) Well, I've purchased some merchandise, such as clothing, like this shirt but not the soundtrack. Since, I got the BB soundtrack. But, I do have this poster and this one. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I know, 15% of the people I know didn't bother to go see TDK, instead they saw, Mamma Mia or Space Monkeys. Yup, the Joker's look is totally awesome and unbelievable. :) I know, what makes him evil is what makes him funny. Of course he's not an idiot, he's clever with the things he's done, to quote Batman "He's dumb, but he's not stupid". And, he's my ultimate favorite villain. Too bad your not interested in his article. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:46, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

No, I'm not trying to persuade you, but you do like working on articles from different topics and stuff, so I figured. :P Well, the people that I know are not the typical comic book fans, but are interested in seeing the comic book based film. Yeah, many people have many different choices in what types of films they want to see. Also, TDK broke box-office record, that's so awesome. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I knew it was gonna do good at the box-office, but I never knew it was going to surpass Spider-Man 3's record and go even higher. :) I guess my six times helped out. Yeah, the article started getting edited after the release of TDK. Yeah, the article is complicated, but I did get some suggestions on how to improve the article, since I did put a peer review up. Sure, I would like to help you out with the article. I think citing the comic books would be good sources. Is the article getting some love? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Just do what I did, search the comic book title and get the info. from there. But, getting/reading some graphic novels/comics would be a good idea, also. Hey, if you want to start on something, that is not hard, why not work on the BB video game article? Something easy and not hard. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:26, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that's right, you haven't played the game. Oops, I forgot. Well, who cares, it was still a suggestion. I can sorta helped you, since I do own the game, but I'm not really sure. :P --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's so true and I really don't know anything on how to write a video game article. Wow, now I don't know what to say. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, I should branch out and explore other things. ;) But....... what? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

infobox order

No, I'm not bothered. I understand that FLC (and all other review processes) will expose short-comings in templates around Wikipedia, that's good (in a way) but not really our job. Regardless of what I think, I'll bow to community consensus and if no-one is saying there's something wrong then it's no issue. However, I am grateful for you up-frontness (should that word ever exist, shoot me) but unless it becomes an issue then it won't stand in the way of promotion. Having said that, anything that improves the whole Wikipedia works for me. So, that's a kind of "mmmmemememmnhehbleuhgh" answer, isn't it? For me, it's no issue. But the better, the better. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Discogs

Gary, you continually impress me. I've revisited some of your current FLCs and you've made a number of subtle but important adjustments to them. Awesome. Keep it up. And, should you consider the old RFA business, give me a shout first. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmph. So it took you 13 mins to sort out Norah "Ravi Shankar" Jones. Good work, plus good citations. Pah. I think it won't be long before you just submit the perfect FLC. Keep up the good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:13, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your review of Macrosociology

Thank you for doing such a quick review. Since part of the project (the article is being expanded to GA as a goal of an educational assignment) is to teach the students how to write a GA, could I ask you for a longer review (there are I believe other issues that make this article fail at present) - the students need as detailed review as possible so they can try to address the issues. Isn't it also customary to place the article on hold for a few days to let the editors address the objection? Thanks again, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes. It's a project listed at WP:SUP (full details here), I've notified related WikiProjects some time ago, and I was planning to make an announcement at GA talk page over the next few days, when the 5 groups are ready for nomination (since I will be grading the articles in a week, I am trying to get the students to have some GAR worthy material a few days before then, so they reviewers have a chance to review and the students to address the concerns...).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I only stressed it four or five times in class... :> --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

ping

:) Naerii 09:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Brigham Young University alumni thank-you

Thank you very much for your comments regarding the list's FLC. If your concerns have been resolved, I would ask you to please offer a supporting vote on the list's behalf. Thank you for your consideration. --Eustress (talk) 13:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Arctic Monkeys awards

That's okay. Good luck getting it promoted. Red157(talk • contribs) 18:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar for table fixing

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		... for fixing the [ever recurring sorting problem] of table presented at List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita Tomeasy T C 19:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I, on the other hand, was not even able to paste the link to the diff properly ;-) Tomeasy _{T C} 19:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sharapova review

Hi,

Firstly, thank you for such a speedy review! I was not expecting results for ages.

Your first issue regarding proper formatting for citations is taken on board, and will be sorted asap. However, I would like to take issue with your saying most of Career requires references; are you suggesting every result mentioned requires a source? I am not personally really sure if that is necessary (I believe Wiki policy states only contentious or obscure statements or quotes require citations, none of which cover these results) and indeed, I do not believe any other tennis article does this. We will get these sources if it is required, however. As for "on-court tennis outfits" - my personal opinion is that that section should go, but if there is no consensus for that, hopefully some sources can be found.

Do you believe that when these two issues are resolved, the article qualifies for GA?

Thanks for your help! Whitenoise123 (talk) 01:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Norah Jones awards

Supported. I assume you forgot to add a comment to this? Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, clever. :-) Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Favour

Hi Gary, just to stop you nominating more lists (!) can you do me a huge favour and have a look at a few others for me if you get a chance? The ones in most need right now are WWE No Way Out (FLC), List of Academy Award-winning foreign language films (FLC) and 2008 WWE Draft (FLC. Much appreciated, as always. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 07:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't really mind Gary, I know your lists are usually high quality and any comments made against them are dealt with swiftly. We currently have 50 FLCs running now without a backlog, which is pretty incredible. I'm just trying to keep it manageable and approachable! But do keep up the great work... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

And on that note, I think I addressed your concerns at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Academy Award-winning foreign language films. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 08:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey

You should go check your Azerbaijian talk page, I think I put a welcome template on it, although I cant be a 100% sure. Thanks for your help over at WP:AN and Meta! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 08:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha, yeah its been quite a day. Someone left a note on the help desk saying that the Azerbaijian Wikipedia was being vandalized (shock images on templates that ere transcluded to the main page). So I went over to help and then things went crazy, and 70 edits later here I am. The one thing I have found out is "salam" is "hello" in Azerbaijian :) Haha, and yeah conversing over there would be funny. You do know that you can go to your preferences over there and have the interface translated to english. It does help. Also, you dont know how helpless you feel over there reverting vandalism, there wasnt any active admins (there are only 2 total!), I couldnt block him, I didnt even have rollback or TWINKLE, so I was undoing the edits, and I wasnt even autoconfirmed, so I had to fill in a captcha (sp?) if my undo added any external links to the page. It was tiring! Hopefully I got enough attention that some people will help out. I looked at their user creation log and saw a flurry of names that I know, so hopefully some people can get it under control. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 08:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I sent an email to the only 'crat asking. We'll see...but sadly I thinking I would fail based mostly on the language barrier. They are going to get 2 more admins on the 26 though, so hopefully that will help. Well I off to bed. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 08:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey Gary

..I responded to your concerns at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/WWE No Way Out. Thanks Gary.--S_RX 14:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC) and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2008 WWE Draft.--S_RX 14:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I responded again. Thanks.--S_RX 18:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The Dark Knight

Didn't Ra's al Ghul have big cats that he sicked on Batman? :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Gotham City Zoo? :D What's your guess for the next film's theme and villain? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I know that Christian Bale signed on for three films, but I think Nolan only signed on for two. I imagine that they'll bring him back, anyway. Right now, it's just talk, but TDK is making major bank. To be honest, I don't know how Nolan will top this one. Thematically, it's an enormous challenge. The Joker just threw Gotham into chaos. I can't see any other "realistic" Batman villains doing anything on that scale. I think Catwoman should have a role, since the film needs some new estrogen now. The only storyline I can imagine right now is something to do with Bane (a drug storyline with roots in Scarecrow and Batman Begins). —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:27, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't blame you; the romantic angle would have to be pretty well-written. It's going to be a sausagefest in the next one, though. Mr. Freeze would work if done well, but you're right, a lot of people have Arnie's portrayal in mind. I don't know why Nolan has dismissed the Penguin, though... I can see him being written as a heavyset gang leader like in recent comics. I see the Penguin as more of a side character, though, like Sal Maroni. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Spider-Man 3 was a huge disappointment. Its Wikipedia article was one of my first serious projects, and when the film came out and I saw it, I couldn't care less about the condition of the article. X-Men 3 had its moments, but it didn't reach its potential. You're right about Batman Begins having a limited scope then expanding to the city scale of The Dark Knight. I don't want to see Batman venture beyond Gotham City 'cause I can't see him as part of the JLA on screen. Hopefully, Nolan will go on and make another film like he did The Prestige and maybe come back with a decent idea. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Or the third Terminator or Return of the Jedi (still decent, but doesn't compare to The Empire Strikes Back with its Ewoks). Maybe pre-written trilogies are the only worthwhile ones... since you know everything that will happen and plan accordingly. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you about that. The trouble is that studios want to take advantage of cash cows. With Bale signed on for a third film, I imagine that they'll pursue it with or without Nolan based on the momentum. Wish that individuals like you and me could be capable of creating ultra-realistic productions of films like these with our desktop computers or something! :-P I'm sure there's a lot of creativity that wouldn't want to be restrained. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I think that the contracts were pre-Batman Begins, so I'm sure their working relationship has really strengthened since. I don't mind studios having the drive to make big-budget films, but I'm not crazy about sequels where they're not necessary. At some point, you're going to shoot yourself in the foot worrying more about the bottom line than about creativity. I do love how The Dark Knight had a lot of practical effects. One shot I loved was when the Tumbler collided with the garbage truck head-on. But everything definitely felt down-to-earth. I'm shocked that a film like Superman Returns wasted so much on VFX and failed to create any memorable scenes (the only one I really liked was the bullet hitting the eye). There were a ton of great scenes in The Dark Knight, VFX or no... I know it's been said before, but Ledger was amazing as the Joker. So many great lines, especially in the interrogation room both with the Batman and later the cop. Two-Face's story arc was compelling, too -- I enjoyed Eckhart's performance a lot because I had no idea what to expect. I loved realizing how all his pre-burn coin flips were truly making his own luck -- scoring the date with Rachel Dawes, examining the witness at trial, etc. It was tragic when he turned, especially when he was ready to shoot himself at the right flip of the coin. "Then why was I the only one who lost everything!?" I really hope that he doesn't come back, though... with the way his story went (not quite as psychotic in the two-faced sense), I don't see him as a serial villain. Another great portrayal was Oldman as Gordon... he was a bit player in Batman Begins, but he had so much weight in the sequel. Other great scenes: the pencil scene, the building revelation of Harvey's burnt face-half (especially with Gordon's expression), Alfred taking back the note, the Skyhook scene, the hospital detonation scene, etc. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:References for The Simpsons episode articles

Greetings, I just got back from a 3 week trip, so I apologize for the late response. The main references used are the DVD commentaries, but we'll use anything we can find from sites like EW, IGN, Variety, etc. Unfrotunately, The Simpsons doesn't get as much mainstream coverage as shows like Lost, so we usually don't have a lot of choice for sources. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Question

Are you working on anything, in the moment? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:08, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I was maybe wondering if you would like work on Superman Returns, but I don't know if you're interested or not. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

TBH, it would fail, since the article does need work and some citation tags are in the article. But, I'll take your advice and work on something besides bios and events. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I totally get what you mean now. :p Yeah, it has its chance, but I'll see what can be found and be added to the article. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not a Superman fan either, but he is a superhero. Its cool, I was just wondering if you'd be interested or not, but its cool. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:19, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I got X-Men, I'll review it in a little while. As for FL, I'm not very familiar with the process. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

FLC

I am trying to fix it. If you know what I need to do please let me know.--Kumioko (talk) 01:34, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia: Featured list candidates/List of Phoenix Suns head coaches

I was wondering if you want to review this featured list candidate. If you do, please just click on the subtitle. K. Annoyomous24 01:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

script

Hi Gary—Thanks for your advice on my talk page; inexplicably, half the instructions weren't showing in the cap, which I've fixed. Your short-cut suggestion of pasting an "import script" in one's monobook: a few queries—

• I've tried it and it works, and even shows my monobook in the edit summary. Although I'd changed Lightmouse's monobook reference to mine (at his request), mine still shows up even though I'm borrowing his. Will this be the case for other users who do the short-cut? Lightmouse doesn't want his name on other people's script-running.
• I presume that people who already have script in their monobook.js can insert importScript('User:Lightmouse/monobook.js/script.js') below their existing script, which will preserve that script as well as enabling the ?proxy use of Lightmouse's with the user's own monobook on the edit summary.
• I've changed your "dates" to "all dates", since "dates" removes only linked date fragments. Hope that's OK. Tony (talk) 02:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot band members FLC

I just wanted to let you know that I've revised the prose on List of Slipknot band members per your comments the the review page. Let me know if there's any additional fixes needed. Thank you! Blackngold29 05:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Vancouver Canucks head coaches

I was wondering if you want to review my featured list nomination for List of Vancouver Canucks head coaches. Thanks if you do! –.– K. Annoyomous24 23:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm a grammar-nerd

Squirrel-like, I'm always on the look-out for glitches to use in my tutorials. I hope you don't mind!

User:Tony1/Advanced_editing_exercises#Exercise_2h:_Vol._3:_.28The_Subliminal_Verses.29

Tony (talk) 10:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

IMAX

Awesome, I guarantee you that the experience is super cool. :P You won't regret it. If you do, then I guess I'm the blame for costing you some cash. ;) I saw TDK again, what a great film. Dang, that film is so intriguing to watch. Oh, guess what Batman villain has been compared to the Unabomber? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't be surprise, that's like my ultimate favorite films, of all time. If I were you, I'd reserve the tickets now, so you'll have a chance to watch it on IMAX. Do it now, before its too late. ;) You must be suffering that B&R hasn't been reviewed yet, right? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:40, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha, I'd review it, believe me I would, but it'd be conflict of interest. If you have another article at GAN, I'd be happy to review that one. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Aren't there instructions to tell you how to print the tickets? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Its basically the same deal as going to a simple movie theater. But, you gotta show them the pass, in order for you to see the film. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I reserve my tickets and when I get to the theater I just say my name and I have my tickets. I don't know if Canada has those same procedures. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:16, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess its different. Cause, here you gotta let the ticket person scan the pass and in order for the pass to be valid and stuff. That's why I "cut in line" and have my tickets already reserved. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

No, I go online and buy the tickets, but there's this option in which you can buy them, meaning you can print them off your computer or having them reserved and showing ID and getting the tickets. That way, you don't need to wait in-line and just get your tickets fast. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

That's what I thought at first, but I couldn't take it waiting in line for a long time. TBH, this way is better. Luckily, I only do this when the interesting films are out. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:51, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Well no, there's no time limit, just arrive. I get there early. :p Then show your ID, (proof of purchase), since the tickets are reserved under your name and your set and enjoy the film. When I'm purchasing the tickets online, I pay with my credit card. I don't know about the theaters selling the reserved tickets to other people, since I get there in time and stuff. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alex Albrecht.jpg

i will get you the email from him tomorrow hopefully, if in the neantime you need to delete it, you can. i will put it back up when they send the email again. i deleted the original not thinking that i would need it. i emailed him again and asked for him to send one again for the picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Njautobody (talk • contribs) 04:11, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

yeah, thats fine i understand, hopefully i will get the email back soon, if not, i will just wait until he sends it, also the email will be for kevin rose's picture too they both requested it to be changed. Njautobody (talk) 04:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

RFK assassination FAC

Fixed the items you pointed out in your comments - just letting you know. Fritzpoll (talk) 09:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

BYU alumni list FLC

Just another quick reminder that the FLC for this list is still going on. If your issues have been resolved, please offer a supporting vote so the list can progress. Thank you! --Eustress (talk) 11:34, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Mission 5: Solar solicitude/solidarity

Hi Gary,

As an FA-Team member, I'm soliciting your assistance with FA-Team Mission 5 on Scattered disc and Solar energy (and possibly others). Please sign up on the mission page and watchlist the mission page and articles if you are interested in helping out. Thanks, Geometry guy 15:46, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Deleted image

It was the same image and I deleted it. As for your second comment, it's true. Many administrators simply don't want to deal with it because 1) copyright is a messy, annoying, and tedious thing to get involved in 2) many administrators aren't familiar with code or templates in general. More power to you for your upcoming RfA :p sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 19:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Diggnation

No problem. As soon as I saw the episode this morning I knew there would be trouble. Both are right in that their images are not that flattering, however till someone coughs up a free one for Commons, they're stuck with current images. I'll keep an eye on both article, plus the main Diggnation one for the next week or so to try and help out. --Brownings (talk) 03:04, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

How do you know Ra's al Ghul is dead?

I am curious to know. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:55, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I realize we don't need to list every character who dies as "unknown status", but this is Ra's al Ghul, who is supposedly an incredible human being in terms of intelligence and martial arts, so it is not improbable that he escaped the train before the explosion, and the last thing seen is him closing his eyes. I'm not saying he's alive, but for the plot summary to be neutral, it should say exactly what happens, not that he died, because that's not what we see. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:04, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:Mount Pelee

Thanks, I knew the article would fail, I just wanted to see what I needed. --Meldshal (§peak to me) 16:14, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

West Bromwich Albion F.C. seasons

Thankyou for your comment at the FLC page of West Bromwich Albion F.C. seasons. Although I agree with you that the key would more logically fit above the list, Struway2 makes a good counter-argument and I'm hesitant to make the change without a reasonable consensus. I'm still struggling with how best to phrase the lead, and in particular how to introduce the list without self-referencing or sounding too false, so I'd appreciate any ideas you have with this. Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 20:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alex Albrecht-5279.jpg

Regarding the image, the uploader claims that the video is the only permission required for Wikipedia to use the images. Gary King (talk) 20:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

That doesn't provide permission. Stifle (talk) 20:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Slipknot band members

You previously left comments on the FLC for this article and I would appreciate if you could look the article over again as many changes have been made and I think your concerns have been dealt with. REZTER ^TALK ø 07:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

GA Review Anti-copyright

Could you have a look on the discussion page, I had a question. Ta --SasiSasi (talk) 15:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Technophobia

Someone renominated it a day after you failed it so you may want to look again, Tom (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I am well aware of the issues; I'd suggest posting them to the article's talk page and to the talk page of the student(s) who have renominated it. Despite my best efforts, it appears that some students don't understand the need for communication to flow two-ways and that they need to address the objections before renominating. On the bright side, most do. For those who don't, again, I'd suggesting addressing some comments to their talk pages; I try to do so in class. Thanks for your interest again! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:57, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry about editing articles without logging in, I forgot.

--6afraidof7 (talk) 16:29, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

4X FAC

Thanks a lot for your comments at the 4X FAC discussion. I know I'm probably just being antsy / pushy, but any further feedback would be appreciated, let alone a !vote of support. Check in when you find a moment. Thanks! Randomran (talk) 18:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Amateur radio frequency bands in India

Hi! I'm having a tough time sorting the rows for this FLC. It simply does not sort according to the way it is supposed to. Do you know how to rectify this? The Allotted Spectrum section has been my test bed. Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:36, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Minnesota Timberwolves draft history

All your concerns have been answered and you still didn't Support, comment, or Oppose this featured list nomination. Please do so. Thanks! -- K. Annoyomous24 01:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Batman

See, I told you that the experience is awesome. ;) I'm glad you don't regret seeing it in the IMAX version. Oh, congrats on getting B&R to GA. :p --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Technophobia

Hi, I just wanted to thank you for your advice and critisms on the technophobia article. I understand the reasons for not recieving GA status and hardly expect it to change under reevaluation, which coincidentally was submited by our rouge group member. I am curious though if we might be eligible for a B class rank. From what I understand, the specifications for this are slightly more ambiguous and less restrictive. I appreciate your time and assistance you have given us.

Sincerly, Mrm62 (talk) 02:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)mrm62

FA economics challenge

Gary, I was wondering if you might be able to add input regarding the FairTax (FA) article. This article has become increasingly stressful. It has even been listed at the Fringe Noticeboard in an attempt to remove sourced economic research about the plan. It centers on the claim that economic growth under a consumption tax is fringe science. Since the research performed on the plan supports the claim and no "serious" economist in their view has refuted the research, they want to remove supporting research. I don't know what your position is on tax reform nor do I care if you support or oppose such a bill. I've always found you to be honest, provide good discussion, and you know economics and Wikipedia policy well. You're quite familiar with the work and quality needed in a FA article. We need some level heads that can look past the emotional topic and discuss policy and FA standards with regard to a tax / economic topic. Your help would be appreciated. Morphh ^(talk) 13:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - I don't think you'll need much knowledge on the topic. I can cover those areas quite well. We've had a couple editors involved from the UK. I think the biggest issue is just understanding policy and helping to convey it (to either party). Actually being from outside the U.S. may help as you can look at the issue / article from the outside. Morphh ^(talk) 16:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses)

Checked. --Efe (talk) 05:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Halo (series) peer review

Hey Gary, I noticed that you left some helpful comments on Halo (series)'s last attempt to become a featured article, which unfortunately did not suceed. If you have the time, I would appreciate it if you could leave comments on its current peer review page about any aspect that you can. Thank you! Blackngold29 03:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot band members FLC

Just a quick reminder, it's been a few days and I believe all your comments about List of Slipknot band members have been adressed. If there is anything else please let us know. Thank you! Blackngold29 03:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Award FLCs

Gary, you currently have three award FLCs overdue with no support. I can't really fault the lists so I'm reticent to close them as no consensus to support but I also don't tend to promote without a single support in place. Possibly you've flooded the market nominating three similar lists so close together. If no supports are forthcoming by the end of the day, I'll probably archive them and suggest you drip feed them back into FLC and get additional support. Hope you understand my position...! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Gary, I've archived four of your award FLCs - you seem to be on a wikibreak and your FLCs have stagnated somewhat - feel free to attend to the comments of other editors who reviewed your lists and renominate should you think you've addressed them. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review Request

Hey Gary King, I currently have the article The Great American Bash (2005) up for Peer review, here. I come to you in hopes of you reviewing the article, as I'm aiming to get this article prepared for Featured Article status. I would really appreciate if you would take some time and review this article to the best of your abilities. Cheers, -- iMatthew _T.C. 13:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Huggle feedback

Hi there. Your section on the huggle feedback page has been archived and is now located here I am not sure if you managed to fix the problem that you were getting. If you did not then please add a new section to the huggle feedback page, please try the newest version of huggle (released today) before doing this. If you would like to reply to this message please use my talk page as I will not be checking back here. Thanks. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 18:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Hypopituitarism

On Talk:Hypopituitarism you expressed misgivings at the excessive reliance on a single source. I have begun diversifying into other sources, but I was wondering if you think that there's anything wrong in principle with 34 references to the same paper. Could you clarify on that talkpage? JFW | T@lk 06:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Gary, could I have your views on this? JFW | T@lk 09:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Integrated banner for WikiProject Computer science

I have made a proposal for a integrated banner for the project here . I invite you for your valuable comments in the discussion. You are receiving this note as you are a member of the project. Thanks -- Tinu Cherian - 10:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

New FA-Team mission needs your help!

Félix Houphouët-Boigny needs to be copyedited and peer reviewed. We would appreciate any and all help from the crack members of the FA-Team! Sign up here. Merci! Awadewit (talk) 12:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Error on your user page?

Hi Gary, on your user page it says that Nobel Gas became featured on (August 18, 1868)? Is this an error or am I missing anything? Cheers. — Realist² (Speak) 17:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Makes sense. — Realist² (Speak) 15:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:OC

That's life in Southern California. Basically the same weather year long, then we have one week where it pours constantly, and nothing else. In any case, think you're going to jump into the fire when your vacation is done? ;) sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 08:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Film/Movie Locations FamousLocaions.com

Hi Gary, I run a website FamousLocations.com and we list 233,000 movies and 4,600,000 locations around the world. We list movie locations for the movies. We are a free site and offer great movie/film location info and are interested to get listed on the movie pages at Wikipedia for the pages. We have been running since 2001. What do you think? Thanks David —Preceding unsigned comment added by FamousLocations-com (talk • contribs) 09:17, August 4, 2008

I've set up wider discussion here. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Rock music WikiProject

I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 19:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Final Fantasy VII

Sorry about not being able to help trim the plot, I think that would take someone very familiar with the plot, and unfortunately I am not that person. Congratulations on all your featured topics, may they continue to grow in number! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

dts template

Hi Gary. With Tony1's recent move away from wikilinked dates for the sake of wikilinked dates. As you seem to be guardian of the {{dts}} and {{dts2}} templates (both of which seem to be in common use), I was wondering if a modification could be made to the template so that while it still makes the dates sortable, it doesn't link the dates, e.g. |link=off or something? Hope all is well with you. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Charlie Sheen

Hi, I've increased the career section in the article a few days ago and left a note on It's talk page, you haven't replied yet, is there something wrong? -Music2611 (talk) 14:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

double check

I undid an edit you made in January 2008 to Nuclear fallout.  {{TOCleft}} says that it should only be used if there's a layout problem that it's able to fix. I tried various things and couldn't find a reason that it should be used, but if there's a good reason that I missed, feel free to add it back. --Underpants (talk) 14:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Anti-copyright GA renomination

Hi there, I have renominated anti-copyright as GA article, maybe you want to review it again.--SasiSasi (talk) 18:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: FTC

Not at all, look back through the history and you will see that many users have done it. He tends to be the one to do it, filling the role of unofficial curator, but if you look at his editing history you'll see he hasn't been on in 5 days now, and quote WP:FTC: "Nominations will stay here for ten days if there is unanimous consent, or longer if warranted by debate", so those two promotions I carried out were overdue - rst20xx (talk) 14:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot FT

Would you be opposed to adding the band's three demo albums and three DVD to the proposed Featured topic? The two that aren't GA could quickly be peer reviewed. Blackngold29 12:24, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Rezter's computer hasn't been able to access WP for an unknown reason, so I can talk to him through e-mail, but he's taking a WikiBreak until he can get back on. You've done more with GA noms/reviews than me, do you think either Slipknot Demo or Welcome to Our Neighborhood, could pass a GA review? I have no more info on them and Rezter wrote the articles, so I assume he doesn't have anything more either. If not a GA then we should probably get them peer reviewed, but I don't know what a reviewer would say, as we can write pretty well and we have no more sources. I don't think we'll need to include the singles, I doubt many sources exist for them. All Hope Is Gone (album) comes out in 18 days, so I'll try to add whatever reviews come out, it should only take a week or two after release to have it in GA shape. It will definately have enough length to go for FA eventually, but we'll need more reviews and Lyrics/Musical info before that. Blackngold29 16:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: LA

How was your trip? I hope you had fun, that's my hometown. :) I'm assuming you wanted a little "break", right? ;) Anyways, I've gotten "Upgrade U" and won't review it 'til tomorrow, since I got some other GAN's I gots to review. Do you think this has FL potential? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, its so hot. Just image the heat here. Good to know you had fun. ;) Yeah, I was looking at the list and I thought maybe it might be a good thing to fix. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

St Lythans

Hi Gary, would you be able to spare a couple of minutes to help me please? I've just written my first article - entitled St Lythans. I've cited a whole load of references, but none of them have appeared. I can't see where I went wrong. Could you take a look please? Really appreciate it. Cheers. Daicaregos (talk) 14:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Gary. It was good of you to spare the time to help. All the best. Daicaregos (talk) 21:51, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

"Upgrade U"

I was surprised! --Efe (talk) 03:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I had no access on the internet for two days. Thanks for bringing a Beyonce-related article to GA. BTW, Its just that its a non-GA requirement but I'll clean-up more the article and add some info in the background/writing section. Thanks. --Efe (talk) 09:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I added it on my list. Is it ok? --Efe (talk) 09:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. --Efe (talk) 11:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

X-Men (film)

You might wanna glance at Talk:X-Men (film). A lot has happened. In addition you'll probably have to edit your "major contributions" section. Cheers. Thanks for reviewing a ton of my articles. —Wildroot (talk) 03:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

That article is up for GA nomination. Are you in for another review? —Wildroot (talk) 02:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

It would help if you did the GA review and passed it off. That would be nice. —Wildroot (talk) 05:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but none of your original work is really there. I overhauled that article from scratch practically. —Wildroot (talk) 05:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

British Bangladeshi

Hi there Gary King, I have nominated the article British Bangladeshi quite time ago, but no one has come to review it would you please be able to come and review it, thanks a lot. Bye. M Miah (talk) 10:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Peer reviews

Well, I can't say much, since the season hasn't premiered and the "episode" hasn't been released. Maybe after it premieres/comes out, I can say something. Sorry, if I'm not of any help. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sorry. If it were articles that had more info., then yeah, I'd be voicing my opinion on the PR. :( --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

2008 Summer Olympics venues

Have tried to address your concerns about the lead. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 00:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:CHICAGO

According to my records, you have nominated at least one article (Kanye West & Theodore Kaczynski) that includes a category at WP:CHIBOTCATS and that has been promoted to WP:FA, WP:FL or WP:GA. You are not signed up as an active member of WP:CHICAGO. If you consider yourself either an active or semi-active member of the project please sign up as such at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/members. Also, if you are a member, be aware of Wikipedia:Meetup/Chicago 3 and be advised that the project is now trying to keep all the project's WP:PR, WP:FAC, WP:FAR, WP:GAR, WP:GAC WP:FLC, WP:FLRC, WP:FTC, WP:FPOC, WP:FPC, and WP:AFD discussion pages in one location at the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Review page. Please help add any discussion you are aware of at this location.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Featured Article Nominations

Thank you for pointing this out to me. As recommended, I have transcluded them. Regards. --Bugnot (talk) 22:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Update:- Dear Gary: Though you're partially correct but at least, and I hope so that, the Iraq War and Vladimir Putin articles don't need any further improvement and satisfy the Featured Articles requirement. Please reconsider. I also request you to help in improving the article List of most wealthy historical figures. Please provide as many references and sources as you can. Thanks! --Bugnot (talk) 04:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice, Gary. I'll list it for Peer Review soon.

--Bugnot (talk) 14:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:User:Bugnot's FLC nominations

I'm not as upset by driveby noms as some are. Both seem destined to fail, so there really seems to be no reason to keep them up the full 10 days. I'll live the historical one up, he's edited that several times before August, and he may decide to attempt to address concerns. As for the 100 wealthiest list, you were the one who nominated it last time, and if you don't think it's ready, then I'll remove it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 05:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Theodore Kaczynski

I appreciate your comments with regard to making sure that fact tags are not overly applied, but you should also be careful about reverting valid edits with respect to the use of the standard wiki style conventions (such as for biographies) and date tags. Also, the Theodore Kaczynski article is a mess...a lot of information is repeated numerous times throughout the article, and much of it is out of chronological order or otherwise not located in standard wiki locations. Please be a little more careful with making wholesale reversions. Thanks! CiudadanoGlobal (talk) 05:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

What's It Gonna Be (Beyoncé Knowles song)

Hello. I have no sources about this single. I have been searching all about Dangerously in Love when taking this to GA but I haven't read about "What's It Gonna Be". Why? You're taking it to GA also? I'll try to find. --Efe (talk) 06:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. You love the song? We can it take to GA if sources come to light. Any other Beyonce-related song you would like to promote? By the way, could you please help me or give comments to "Deja Vu"? I am taking it to FA, for the third time, to the FAC room sometime this month, when issues are resolved. Thanks Gary. --Efe (talk) 06:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Thanks. --Efe (talk) 06:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Its a special release so I think sources are limited. But I think there are sources out there that need to be discovered. I am thinking that if it managed to chart (in Japan), it would be hard for us to read their sources, if it was not written in English. As for the production and music and lyrics, need to be searched on and offline. --Efe (talk) 07:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

FA query

Gary, someone mentioned to me that you may be looking to do more of the routine, janitorial, maintenance-type "stuff" that I do on FA-related pages. Interested? I'm talking about tedious, mindless, routine crap that occupies much of my time daily. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Gary, with a sales pitch like this.. how can you resist. ;-) Thanks Sandy for all that you do! Your hard efforts don't go unnoticed and are much appreciated. Morphh ^(talk) 18:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Morphh! I responded on my talk; like to keep conversations together, and Gary already split it :-0 SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

About the Norah Jones list

Congratulations on the Featured List Status with the Norah Jones award list. But I have one question about it, why the Grammy Nomination for Best Pop Vocal album for "Feels Like Home" is not included? And even in the Lead Section you also add another Grammy Nomination for her work with Foo Fighters and is not included on the summary, it should be 9 wins from 11 noms. Correct me if I am wrong.

Congratulations once again, is good to see good articles about a great performer.

Sincerely, Jaespinoza (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Unlinked dts

Hi Gary, sorry to nag but did you get anywhere with making a {{dts}} adjustment that allows an unlinked date to be created? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Fantastic, thanks a lot. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:03, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Oil shale extraction

Hi, Gary. I would like to ask your help with the FAC nomination of the Oil shale extraction article. I knew you have gone through the FAC procedure previously and probably you could help with edits/comments in this process. Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 13:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Your thoughts on an FTC

Hey, good question. Well firstly I want to point out that there are no rules in WP:GA? regarding minimum length of GAs, so in theory, so long as it is as well researched as it reasonably can be, then it should be able to pass GA. Further I would point out that all articles currently in topics as audited articles are Lists. The first article to go in as an audited list failed a FLC simply because it was too short (though there is no rule at WP:FL? about length either but there you go). So my opinion on the matter then, is that I would oppose any inclusion of a non-GA, unless that non-GA has been nominated for GA, and failed solely due to inherent shortness. In which case I would probably disagree with whoever did the GA review on that front, but there's nothing you can do about that and hence I think it's a de facto GA (just a bit shorter) and so would be fine for inclusion. Make sense?

On the article front, maybe you could see if you can find a Japanese speaker to do some searching for you, but I agree that that looks like there won't be much out there :/ - rst20xx (talk) 15:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, absolutely :/ But if you have you do what I suggested and nominate it for GA regardless of how successful I think it will be, then I think you really have your bases covered. I'm thinking of starting a campaign in favour of removing any minimum length misgivings for featured/good content, because really the ratings should just reflect the quality of the content, not the quantity. And if that's successful, then we can do away with the "limited subject matter" clause at FTC, as well - rst20xx (talk) 17:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

If you called it "Films directed by person", I would support, yes. See also the state touring routes topic, which excludes the US, Interstate and unsigned routes, despite its main article doesn't - rst20xx (talk) 13:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that is much correct. It is up to the voters to determine whether a scope is too arbitrary, or is oversplitting a topic, and for that reason I cannot guarantee you won't get some oppose votes, just that in your example I would support - rst20xx (talk) 18:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Reference Scroll

Hello there. Would you mind clarifying why you removed the reference scroll on Barenaked Ladies (at least that's the only one I noticed)? It keeps the article much cleaner and easier to read, and I personally feel that the |2 dual column format is relatively useless on articles like this, as almost all references are a full line width if not longer, meaning splitting into two columns, which just cuts references in each column into two rows instead of one (taking up the same page length). The scrollbox is far cleaner, takes up less space, and links to the references still scroll the scroll box to the proper reference (at least in my browser tests). Please let me know what you object to with regards to the scrolling references, so perhaps it can be addressed. Thanks.

PS: I have just noticed that at some point, someone added a 2nd reflist (2 column) within the scroll, in addition to the regular reflist, so it was double listing. I don't know if this was part of your reason for deleting it, but that shouldn't have been doubled. TheHYPO (talk) 07:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks TheHYPO (talk) 07:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Paul_Erik#Support

Hi, Gary. Thank you. That was an accident. Thanks for informing me. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 07:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

GA Review please!

Hi there I nominated the article, British Bangladeshi as a GA, and I think it looks fantastic which covers nearly every information needed, so can you please see whether it meets the GA criteria and list it if you can?? Thanks!!! Mohsin 18:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

{{dts2}}

Gary, there's a notice on this template saying it's been deprecated but it's still in use. Can you confirm this template should no longer be used and that {{dts}} provides a compliant superset of functionality instead? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

A question

I just saw the recently promoted Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses) - congratulations! I noticed that the album listing on Slipknot's website does not use parentheses in the album's name, nor does the listing in Roadrunner's catalog. While many of the other references used in the article do use parentheses, it would seem that there could be no better sources than the band itself and the record label. Has there been any discussion about this that I missed somewhere? Asking here to avoid creating drama at a newly promoted article's talk page :) Maralia (talk) 18:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

What's It Gonna Be (Beyoncé Knowles song)

I just finished reading Wikipedia's polocy on song in WP:MUSIC#Songs and it makes sense to redirect this. But if you give me a little time I'll see if I can bulk up the article so it won't be a stub. Ratizi1 (talk) 22:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I just finnished adding to the article. Does it still look like a stub? Ratizi1 (talk) 23:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll look for some but finding it could be tricky. I'll try. Ratizi1 (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The only good references I can find are a few music stores with the single information and a youtube link to the commercial. I'm not sure if these are the kinds of sources wiki looks for but they confirm a lot in the article. Ratizi1 (talk) 03:54, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I added some sources, two of them from Amazon. I'm not sure if I'm missing anything that needs to be sourced. Ratizi1 (talk) 04:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

{{In-universe}}

Howdy. Would you willing and able to do the change I suggested here?--Rockfang (talk) 07:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Suggesting Changes to Milton Friedman Article

I've requested a reassessment of the good article status of the Milton Friedman article based on lack of neutrality, and have added a POV tag to the article. Please join the discussion, if you are interested. Thanks. Jdstany (talk) 03:06, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

List of Ciara awards

I guess I can trust you with the Ciara awards page because you have a lot of good article awards. Charmed36 (talk) 03:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Hi Gary. I'm hoping for it not to be a complete and permanent wikibreak but I'm not so sure at the moment. My contributions in various areas have been subject to some criticism lately and it makes me wonder why I dedicate so much time to this place. We'll see. Anyway, keep up your great work at FLC. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm probably trying to do too much too well and I'm ending up doing all of it with mediocrity. Never mind. We'll see. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

History of Microsoft & Paul Allen

Why didn't you try to submit them for FAC? Nergaal (talk) 04:39, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

"Please. Don't." huh? Nergaal (talk) 05:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Some of your nominations do not yet meet the criteria of their respective processes – and you have never edited some of them. Also, what I meant above is not to ask people (especially formulaically) to submit articles to FAC.

I am pretty sure that actually a minute % of the submitted articles for noms do fulfill the criteria. Anyways, this gives me an excuse to contribute to the article - and I am not the first one to do that. As for the FAC thing, it is actually a requirement to contact the people involved before the submission, and if there are 3 equally important contribuitors, I see no reason to create 3 personalized messages. Nergaal (talk) 05:37, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

To be frank, I see you hijacking topics that I have been working on, and don't like it.

Wooow now! Hijacking? Even if you really want to put it that way, if I actually do put energy into any of those that you might be thinking, it only means that the CO-nominations will be soner rather than later.

should submit=if I would see the nomination I would support it; if other ppl are doing it I see not reason to be bound on adding my time to it. Nergaal (talk) 05:48, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't really understand why are we doing this. Anyways, jumping into a FTC-to-be is not discuraged anywhere, submitting GANs is subjective and if somebody disagrees to the nom he can fail it, etc. The only thing I did is (1) ask you for quick feedback, (2) leaving quick suggestions for potential-FAC contribuitors, (3) copying down stuff to my pages so I can take a look in the future and decide myself where to go on. Where am I wrong? At not leaving barnstars behind? Nergaal (talk) 05:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

This is a weird grudge. The period 1 elements... sorry if you understood when I was simply excited to just get going with the topic... But I really don't get your point of view... I told you to complete the nomination and you instead blanked the page, and delayed submitting it. How about the noble gases one? I could say exactly the same thing about the noble gases topic, since was on the list of goals of the wp:elements project (which btw you continously chose to ignore) for several months at that point. The only difference is that w/o you the collaborations for the noble gases page would have been downshifted 2 gears. The result? You submitted the topic alone, then I switched to co-noms; then, when I told you to submit the p1e, you attempted to make it sound as if it was a lone nom, although other ppl were clearly involved in it too... as I've told you allready: it is called COnominations! Nergaal (talk) 06:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

And again, the fact that you submit topics that have been someone's personal goal is a problem. Topics can easily take a person months to build. Yeah, it took WP:elements several years to get at that point and nobody objected to your contribution. When I will submit one of your goals and completely ignore you you should let me know. Otherwise, I don't understand your point - you want to submit FTCs alone because they were your goals? Nergaal (talk) 06:16, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

but taking goals and then working on them just to get the nomination If that was the plan then I would have copied down your entire list. In reality, I just kept what I thought I would actually want/care to contribute. And don't worry, I will reduce the list some more (I just got to do a quick trim until now). Nergaal (talk) 06:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL, And as more minor issue, I don't want to have to keep asking for myself to be added as a co-nominator for the bot to understand Nergaal (talk) 06:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

This is getting extremely annoying; have you ever-ever-ever read anything on the WP:elements? If no, then please stop making suppositions about what you think was happening or who thought what. Secondly, please check both nominations and see that there is a long list of nominators FOR BOTH - whoever does the promotion log ignores that, and that is not my problem. Lastly, unoing premature nomination to you means removing the nominators list while leaving only your name behind? I sincerely think that removing nominators is far worse than dashing for a nomination, and adding all contributors later - which, if bots were to work ok, would be read fully. Nergaal (talk) 06:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

giving actionable solutions that I believe are the right way to go by relating it to past/present grudges to which I try to make a point, and nothing more? What exactly do you want from me? Did I steal any of your nominations (i.e. not added you to the nominators list which a bot should read)? Did I force anybody not to quick-fail any of my nominations? If yes please let me know. If no, please let me know what is your point besides presenting your "gut-wrenching" feelings after misinterpreting my edits. Nergaal (I am too tired to deal with this... whatever you want to albel it) 07:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

At sign

"Good lord" indeed. You yanked the articleissues tag from At sign, but apparently you haven't actually read the article. It's riddled with trivia lists, bad grammar, oodles of unsourced and likely original claims, one-sentence paragraphs, and on and on. Some of its component tags have been there since December 2007, so this isn't new. I've restored the tag. Todd Vierling (talk) 20:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Good Article Review of Starcraft: Brood War

I'm currently reviewing Starcraft: Brood War (which you nominated). Since you're obviously a very experienced reviewer, while this is only my second review, I'd appreciate any comments you have to offer. The review page is Talk:StarCraft:_Brood_War/GA1. --N Shar (talk · contribs) 04:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Burundi

Hi, if you have any time available, could you please GA review Burundi? Thanks. miranda 06:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

edit summaries

Oops, thanks Gary! Tony (talk) 04:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Najib's (and other Ministers') Education Background

I am very intersted in knowing the education Background of our ministers. What degree did they take while they were at university (local and overseas) etc. Can you please provide more information on that on Wikipedia?

If you visit the biography on Iran's Prime Minister, you will see that he has 2 degrees, which is pretty impressive! Wljean (talk) 06:07, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

StarCraft series

I've got a significant overhall planned for this article soon, to properly redo the structure and approach to the article to match some FA articles on similar subjects. Can I request you hold off on any GA nominations on the article for the moment, as its usually easier to make drastic changes before an article in nominated or promoted. -- Sabre (talk) 08:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've laid down a basic structure at User:S@bre/StarCraft (series). The idea is to summarise the video games in more generalised headings (main series and spin-offs), include a development section and a reception section and extend the introduction. Take a look at Halo (series) and Age of Empires, they're significantly higher quality in overall approach due to including that sort of stuff. A section on music would be great too if I can find the sources, and the cultural impact section can certainly be boosted. -- Sabre (talk) 19:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The reception section shouldn't really focus that much on the individual games as it does currently. Look at both Halo series and Age of Empires, ideally we need to make it talk about the overall impact of the series as a whole. Along with that, more on sales and awards is probably the way to go.-- Sabre (talk) 21:14, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Beautiful Liar/GA1

I think I have addressed all your concerns Gary. Please check. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 09:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

That time again...

The obligatory "when do you want to jump into the hellfire" note :p btw, no hurry or intent to rush you. Just curious as I'm leaving for Princeton on Friday sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 10:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

script

Hi Gary—LM says to tell you that it's working (I'm using Gimme's new function now, and it's much better, although (year in baseball|year) it's getting rid of, which will have to be changed. It's ignoring dates within dts and dts2 columns.

Also, please take a look here? Tony (talk) 15:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

older comments about GANs

here. About splitting GANs you said "I believe the primary reason this is all on one page is to encourage people to review articles so that the backlog is kept small. That's, for instance, why pages like WP:FAC choose not to have any categories – so articles keep moving in and out, instead of perhaps having one article languishing on a subpage that most people rarely visit".

I believe that for FAC it makes sense since there need to be multiple reviewers there, and also there is a fairly small number of FACs. GANs on the other hand, are waay more numerous and require only one reviewer. Nergaal (talk) 20:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The best part is that I even stole you idea of adding your contirib-page to my watchlist >:D Nergaal (talk) 04:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/9.0: Live

Hey Gary - did you plan to deal with the rest of Black Kite's concerns (the ones I didn't fix up)? Might get you the support you desperately need on this FAC... —Giggy 07:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Fair use rationale

I'm going to ditch the images. I'd like to have all the box art displayed in one image, so I'm going to take a photo of the covers of SC, BW, Insurrection and Retribution, so we can have it all up in one image, in a similar style to Image:Halo 1 2 and 3 covers.jpg. Just need to dig out my camera. I'll remove the screenshots in the meantime. -- Sabre (talk) 09:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

too bad that sarcasm does not transpose very well into writing

Thanks for the tip with the 4-limit on PRs, but you could have waited at least several hours after posting notice before w/d-ing it. Also, since this stopped being a constructive discussion a long time ago, I think it is better if we both focus on doing something else than pissing on each-other's work. Also, forbidding graphics in FACs/FLCs is not listed as a requirement anymore (or at least I could not find it). As for capping cap other people's comments, I agree with your point; but as long as the commentor is refusing to reply in a timely manner, they only make to other reviewers stay away from adding thier comments too. Nergaal (talk) 16:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, could you actually reactivate the British monarchs PR? Nergaal (talk) 16:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Rushed? Not really. When I've submitted the GANs I thought that they actually look good enough for GA-level, and I submitted them ONLY because I stumped onto them while looking for topics (and not as you seem to think that I am hasting to get topics). On the other hand,there seems to be a huge problem with the strictness of the GA reviews since it varies ridiculously (which I think is a problem for the GAN process that should be dealt with fast). Nergaal (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The actual problem is that I have not really worked with every-day-type topics, and I am not used for example to having to reference information that when searched on google, is spammed by blogs. Also, while I agree with the need for c/e, I despise MOS issues (see my comments at FARC:Helium). Nergaal (talk) 17:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

As for pitching in for topics, I've already told you before that I have no problems with co-noms (although the promotion log might have a problem with it - which is still manually solvable if you actually care about it) especially since I absolutely hate doing the MOS part. Nergaal (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

ps: in my opinion edit summaries are a waste of time since they can be misinformative and can be verified only by doing the same thing as when you whish to check an unsummarized edit. the only time I think is worth doing it is when I move around sections, to allow "verifiers" to ignore that edit. Nergaal (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

bump on the Brithsh monarchs PR request. Nergaal (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

FA

Do you know what is the procedure for a featured article to be displayed in the main page? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 17:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 17:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Slip demo

Did you notify Rezter? I've discussed this with him previously and he felt it was notable enough to warrant its own article, perhaps he could go into more detail for the discussion. I'll leave a comment, but it's late and I have class early, so I'll be able to say more tomorrow. Blackngold29 04:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Personally at this point, I would say merge Demo into Slipknt (band) and put WTON through a peer review so it'll qualify for the Featured topic. I don't see what anyone on a peer review could improve, but I guess we gotta do it as a formality. Blackngold29 15:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll e-mail him and see what he thinks. Blackngold29 16:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Rezter thinks we should get both peer reviewed. I guess that's fine with me too. It would be kind of odd to merge it into the band article and we would have this long paragraph about it that might make the history section awkward. Is that alright with you? It should not effect the amount of FAs we'll need for the FT. Blackngold29 19:01, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

We could get a second opinion? Either way is fine with me, obviously there's some people it should qualify as GA. Blackngold29 19:56, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. If somebody comes up with something, then we can check back in with Malleus Fatuorum‎ and see what he thinks. If it's still a no, then we can finish up 9.0's FAC and get to work on AHIG. I think it would be good to get AHIG to FA before the FT, but we'll see. Blackngold29 20:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't really care either way, so I figured if Rezter wanted to keep it than we might as well. I'm gonna go for a few hours, but should be back later. I guess we just wait for the PRs now.

Oh, do you know of any other good demo articles? Maybe if we found one to use as a precedent we might be able to convince a reviewer about approving a short GA. Blackngold29 20:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Peer review limits

The guidelines for Wikipedia:Peer review ask that editors nominate no more than one article per day (and four total at any one time). While the rules say that one of the requests can be removed, I will let it slide since this is the first time. Take care, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I just point it out to everyone (and the limits will only work longterm if everyone is treated the same). I do appreciate your finding reviewers for your PR requests. Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Meshuggah

Good day! I want to nominate Meshuggah as a FAC and I would like to know your opinion about this article. Can you have a look on it and tell me if something needs to be done so that the article passes all FA criteria please? And I also really need an answer to this question. Can you help me with this please? It would help me very much --  LYKANTROP  ✉ 12:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I alredy asked User:Ealdgyth and User:SandyGeorgia as well, but I did not get an answer. Thanks and have a nice day!--  LYKANTROP  ✉ 18:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Mentoring Request for FLC

Gary,

Giggy mentioned your name as a person who might be a good mentor as I seek to promote an article to Features List status. I'm interested in improving List of universities and colleges affiliated with the Churches of Christ to FL status. Would you be willing to provide occasional adivce and review as I try and work through the process for the first time? Thanks! Jclemens (talk) 17:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's in no way ready. :-) I actually haven't done anything to it yet, other than notice what great untapped potential it has. :-) Jclemens (talk) 17:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I'd noted that and a couple of similar lists of educational institutions. I'll start working towards that sort of an approach, and pop back here once I've gotten significant enough progress made that I have something to show you. Sound good? Jclemens (talk) 17:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Canadian charts

First thought - allmusic includes all the Canadian Billboard charts (I'm Aussie, I dunno what the distinction is). Will look for more. —Giggy 05:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

[19] for "Devil in a Midnight Mass". —Giggy 05:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Not finding anything else. Either they didn't make the top 50 or Allmusic just skipped over them for reasons unknown. —Giggy 06:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Weird indeed. Try this one. Oh, and ref 3 of the list needs a URL (it's currently "[at number Billy Talent awards]". allmusic. Retrieved on 2008-08-31."). —Giggy 06:07, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

StarCraft series images

I had a go at trying to create a combined photo of the CD box art today, but it didn't work out: the image is too small, and had very bad lighting to it—Insurrection looks fine, but the rest look horrible. (I can upload it to Photobucket if you want to give it your own opinion, but I think its pretty damn awful). I'll try again with a better (ie proper) camera when I get back from holiday. I'm also working on getting a free use image of Chris Metzen, the SC series creator, for use in his article. If all goes well, we can shove that into the development section. I don't think any of this will affect the GAN though, I think the prose is all set now. -- Sabre (talk) 12:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

FLC

• Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes

I actually went through the article several times. Do you think it is still missing something? To me the only potential remaining problems might be some of the ref not being quite reliable, but as far as I looked they do not try to ref any potentially 'delicate' information. Nergaal (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I know what are the rules! I did not nominate it and I assumed the main contributor would nominate it (I believe he did so for the previous 2 Olympiads). I just added it to my future watchlist! Nergaal (talk) 19:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, you might not have too much time to look at the list, but are there any issues left for that oppose? Nergaal (talk) 04:14, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I though I replied to that point above and you did not answer which meant me assume that you had no problems with it. Anyways, I have solved the text issue now. Nergaal (talk) 08:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

is zap2it.com considered reliable? Nergaal (talk) 00:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I've checked and I cannot find any author listed; yet they seem to be written by some staff there. If the zap2it are ok, then the refs at least should not posa a problem anymore. Nergaal (talk) 02:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Gary King/localize comments.js

Hi Gary. I think the edit you made yesterday to the script has messed it up. Every signature I've seen today is saying it occurred yesterday. I don't know if signatures done yesterday now say they're from 2 days ago, though. The actual time in the sig is right, just not the day. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 19:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

What's It Gonna Be

The only reference i have about that sample is the actual Live At Wembley booklet inside the DVD. do i scan it or what because I don't know if it would be listed anywhere else. Plus it's not like the samples used in Dangerously In Love or in B'Day have references but we know they're true. Ratizi1 (talk) 10:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Uhm, that would be a good source. --Efe (talk) 11:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Starcraft Ghost

As it has been indefinitely postponed, I would have any issue with it personally- bring it to WT:FAC for some broader input. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 14:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: What's It Gonna Be

Sure, I can add some feedback. But, do you want points on what to add to the article or.... --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Dispenser/Checklinks/json.js

I've been using this for some time after you recommended it; it's great, but any chance you could include the same information that the external tool has – especially publisher, accessdate, etc. that has been entered? Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 22:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not why you would want this, the entries are linked to the reference section bellow. I might add it if there's a compelling reason to do so in the next revision. You could hack it in, the template data is being sent along with everything else. — Dispenser 04:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

dts issue

Hi Gary—Having thought all of the dts issue were solved, I hit a snag with this article. I wonder whether you might have a solution; I've left a note at LM's wishlist page. Thanks. Tony (talk) 12:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

"Beautiful Liar"

I think Im done. Please check. Thank you. By the way, "Déjà Vu" has been on the FAC room for over two weeks and the process has been so slow. Maybe you have comments for it to pass. Thanks again. --Efe (talk) 08:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll work on the additional concern. I'll visit the FAC, maybe, tomorrow. --Efe (talk) 06:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Done on "Deja Vu". Thanks. Please check. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Please recheck "Beautiful Liar". Thanks. --Efe (talk) 03:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I left comments here. Regarding "Beautiful Liar", hard to find source for the premiere date but I think its not contentious. --Efe (talk) 04:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll try but If I can't, I'll ultimately delete that part. --Efe (talk) 04:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I can't find, for now. I replaced it with the release dates instead. --Efe (talk) 04:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Im not yet done copy editing the music video section but Ill do it later. Thanks again for passing. --Efe (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

BTW, you may want to revisit this again: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Déjà Vu (Beyoncé Knowles song). Thanks a lot. --Efe (talk) 09:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Now an FA. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 00:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

LOL, NOT AGAIN!

1. one of the passes was from season 4, the other from season 1.
2. my nom was from season 3 which isn't even anywhere on my list.
3. anybody is allowed to nom whatever on the gans. there is no condition to that.

Nergaal (talk) 03:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

FLRC

Hello, there may be a position open for another FLRC delegate, and I was wondering if you were at all interested in the position. You can find out more here. P.S. We now have an FL IRC channel. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes

Matthewedwards game me a good suggestion and now the prose has been reduced by 70%. There might me some small issues with the new format of the tables, but as far as c/e and general MOS-stuff should not pose a problem anymore. Please take a look again. Nergaal (talk) 06:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Template edit

Gary, since I don't speak this language, can you make sure this edit didn't break anything? Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Should be fine; they just put everything on one line. Gary King (talk) 19:42, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Bot request

Would you be kind enough comment on my bot request at: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Lightbot 3? Regards Lightmouse (talk) 19:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Independence Day (film)

Never mind, I'll review it...if this one goes the way of the last though, I'm not reviewing another... =) ^-talk- the_ed17 ^-contribs- 00:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Review is done; I placed the article on hold. ^-talk- the_ed17 ^-contribs- 01:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

See Talk:StarCraft (series)/GA1. Good luck! Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 01:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

See my talk page for a reply. Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 01:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Hey, would you be interested in running for admin? — Realist² 18:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that's a shame. Maybe in a few months. Anyway, I think you would make a good admin. Later Gary. — Realist² 18:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

SummerSlam (1992)

I am reviewing your article, SummerSlam (1992) for GA. Please feel free to contact me. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 21:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I can't image how that happened. I will review one of your articles if I see one that I can do. Actually, SummerSlam (1992) was a mistake for me to take on because I cannot follow it. I thought because I enjoyed Lockdown (2008) that I could do a wrestling article, but this one is over my head. —Mattisse (Talk) 23:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Lightbot

I see you have removed your supporting comment from the bot request. I am sorry to see it go. Is there a particular reason? Regards Lightmouse (talk) 15:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Charlotte invite

Hi, I've seen you frequently around the article Good Charlotte and other related articles. Please consider joining Good Charlotte WikiProject, an effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage and detail regarding Good Charlotte. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks that you can help with. Thank you for your time.

Gary King (talk) 16:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

{{Talkback}}

Hello, Gary. You have new messages at The ed17's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gary King (talk) 16:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

SPR

Hi Gary,

No, I didn't add that section. All of the stuff I added I cited. I'll be happy to see what I can find though over the next few days. I appreciate what you've done with it.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 00:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Nope, the part I added was about SS's interest in WWII era subjects with the cite. I just moved the Rodat bit from another place in the article and added the 'While' to it for padding. I don't know who added the bit about Rodat and I've tried to find a source for it but have been unable to. I had done a bit of sourcing a while ago and had never been able to find one for that.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 01:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes and I already checked it - no, there's nothing there. It's pretty obvious from a historical perspective that the Niland story had something to do with the plot development and I recall seeing SOMETHING someplace on it but nothing I can find now nor would be comfortable citing. SS speaks very little about Rodat in any of his interviews or in the SPR online site. Instead of removing the entire thing, can it be shrunk and folded in to the article with a wiki-link to the Niland article?--Lepeu1999 (talk) 01:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

On second thought, kill the section. There's already a Nilad reference in the opening. It can go back if the origional contributor pipes up and can find a citation.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 01:11, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep, OR for sure but I removed and replaced with sourced material essentially saying the same thing w/o the hagiography. What do you think?--Lepeu1999 (talk) 01:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Nice, thanks! I will. I tried once before but a) didn't/don't have the editorial experience and b)got no support and a lot of grief from various and sundry. I'm glad you've gotten involved with it.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 02:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

It is one of my favorite films. It gets a lot of attention - unfortunatly the wrong kind. Either kids who try to replicate the plot shot-for-shot or WWII nit-pickers who want to dissect the costume errors down to the nth degree. Then there's the trivia-o-holics (roll eyes) LOL.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 02:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Mine's the old DVD - bought to replace the VHS that was wearing out. No bonus stuff.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 02:14, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Which references?--Lepeu1999 (talk) 20:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not crazy about them as a group and they did try to piggyback some noteriaty off of the SPR article, but the reference seems legit - and it's back up, albiet in less detail, by the SPR online encyclopedia.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 13:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I am impressed

That it takes you exactly 17 minutes to find out what I am writing on hidden pages, to get offended, and to also write a reply.... Nergaal (talk) 20:34, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

updated

The updated maintenance tag was put there by an editor who felt the future tense of the article needs to be corrected, please see the following edit summaries: [20] and [21].--Crossmr (talk) 03:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that would make more sense yes.--Crossmr (talk) 04:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

CSDs

I don't proclaim myself to be an expert on CSDs (as I haven't done them in a while), but I'll do a couple:

• George bandak - G10 here is a bit of a stretch. Usually, G10 is only really appropriate in cases in which it's blatantly obvious that it's an attack page; the content of this article was a bit disparaging but not a full-on attack on the subject. A7 probably would have been a better choice since the subject asserted zero notability.
• Johnny Hobo and the Freight Trains - good A7.
• Rakesh Chaudhary - good A7.
• Jeff ritterman - good G11. Be careful in using G11 though. The "blatant" part of the advertising has to be pretty clear (it is in this case FYI). If the writing is only slightly POV-ish then it's not a G11.
• Leisure Hotels - good G11.
• TemplateNew World Order Party/meta/color - I have no idea what the hell it is, so I'll assume it was a test page and you were right.
• Danaldic 2012 survival - could have been either G1 or A1. G1 is generally used when the stuff is complete and utter gibberish and A1 is cases in which the writing of the article fails to define what the subject is. The cases in which the two intersect are when the text is absolutely incoherent and you can't figure out what the hell the article is about.

That's a few for now. I might do some later, but I'm doing orientation stuff for school now, so I'm a bit busy. Good work though. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 16:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Premature FACs

Gary, you frequently add declarations to FACs that haven't been listed at FAC, and probably shouldn't be listed at FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Habari). This complicates archiving. Please try to make sure a FAC is listed and conforms with FAC instructions before adding declarations. Once you've entered an Oppose, I'm pretty much forced to transclude a snowball article to FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:56, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah alright, I guess that's one of the major problems with watchlisting the other, non-WP:FAC page. I'll make sure next time, especially for articles that obviously do not meet standards yet. Gary King (talk) 17:59, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: TDK

Yeah, I noticed that the article is up for review, but IDK if I can review it, since I have reverted/added/fixed some stuff to the article. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. I felt bad that I couldn't review TDK, since I know that's your main priority right now, so I took the new GA you've added to your page. ;) Um, I'll review Suga Mama, just be patient, I'm sorta working on a "list". :P --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Alright, cool. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Can I get your feedback on something? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Good Topics is now live

IF you wanted to, you could add a lot of the topics you are building to feature and submit them as Good Topics for the time being. You already seem to have many topics that are all GA, so you could potentially have a bonanza of Good Topics if you choose. Just wanted to let you know. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Holy crap. You are one happy bugger. Keep it up :p sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind that I opposed Good Topics; I've been working on the GTCs I submitted for FTC for a while now. Gary King (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. Nice to get recognition for your work though. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV series)

I say this article and was thinking it could be turned into a GA quite quickly. — Realist² 23:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Lol, everyone loves buffy! Anyway, it might be something I look into. — Realist² 13:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey

I have decided that instead of writing an explanation for good topics, it would be easier if I just had a Q&A. Feel free to ask away here :) rst20xx (talk) 02:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Good Topic Nominations

I see that, and appreciate it, but I checked the various topics and according to your user page, you weren't the one to get the articles to GA/FA on the topics I opposed. OK, you did 50% of the Microsoft one, but not the FA. I feel you need to notify the individuals who DID get the articles to GA/FA, and if they are okay with the nomination, then we can proceed. This is all there in the rules, you can't just nominate other people's work without consulting them first - rst20xx (talk) 03:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

These are quite some double standards then, especially when comparing to FTCs such as Wikipedia:Featured topics/Galilean moons, Wikipedia:Featured topics/Gwen Stefani albums, and undoubtedly several more recent ones. If I do this in FTC, then tell me; in GTC, frankly, credit isn't worth nearly as much as it is in FTC. People can and will tag team to game GTC. Gary King (talk) 03:40, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Both those examples were funnily enough disputed for this exact reason, and in both cases the other editors were ultimately notified/brought on board - rst20xx (talk) 14:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'd like to apologize for my behavior yesterday. I slept on it last night. These FTCs were on my Goals page and I was a too enthusiastic to check whether I had contributed to any of the articles in the topics – yet. Sorry. Gary King (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

That's OK, no harm done! I know that notifying the other editors who did the GAs/FAs is a pain, but I really can't see them saying no to a chance to have their work in a Good Topic. Conversely, if someone got someone else's work into a good topic without telling them, they might well be annoyed. It's only polite to consult the editors. But anyway, we'll get all the lot to good topics eventually, I'm sure :) rst20xx (talk) 15:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep. I make mistakes every once in a while, and I try to own up to them even though I'm not very good at that. I try my best. And on that note, I am still really curious as to whether we should include all songs in an album or only its singles? I personally think singles that were released specifically for that album; what I mean is, there are sometimes singles that are on two albums but are only released as a single to promote one of those two albums. Limiting to only singles makes it more obvious as to what to include. Thoughts? Gary King (talk) 15:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I would see all songs and singles related to an album included, whatever the circumstances. They're still part of the album, even if they were part of another album too. That's just my opinion - rst20xx (talk) 15:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh okay, just saw your response. I guess it's better to have all the bases covered. Gary King (talk) 15:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay; I'm going to audit my topics to see which ones are incomplete. Some of them really need to be updated. Gary King (talk) 15:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Mastodon discog - FLC

Your comments are welcome to this list. Cannibaloki 19:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:FTC

What do you think of the second box? --Efe (talk) 11:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

So, are we going to get "Listen" to GA status? --Efe (talk) 23:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I think its not since they only appear in the deluxe edition, and are not main songs/singles. "Listen" is only a hidden track. I am not familiar with TFC. --Efe (talk) 12:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I nominated "Listen". I thinks it looks good now, although needs some little work. --Efe (talk) 12:10, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Well then, lets get to work. hehe. --Efe (talk) 07:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

You've got mail...

« Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 22:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Dark Knight (film)

The article The Dark Knight (film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:The Dark Knight (film) for things needed to be addressed. Cirt (talk) 22:27, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I took another look and added some reevaluation notes. Looks much better, just address those other few points and should be all set. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 04:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

No worries, nice work by all the major contributors, as well as everyone else that helped to contribute to the article. Thanks for addressing my points so fast. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 05:18, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Hi there. I'm PoinDexta1, a long-time (un-experienced, I might add) editor, and I was wondering if you have or ever used VandalFighter. Pretty irrelevant question but hey, life is irrelevant. I look forward to your reply. :P - PoinDexta1 | Talk to Me | 00:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

	<font=3> Thanks again for your helpful comments - Hillsgrove Covered Bridge made featured article today! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:VGT

I would say so, yes. Sorry - rst20xx (talk) 08:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

London Peer Review - Wikipedia:Peer review/London/archive5

Hi there,

Thank you for your comments on London's previous FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/London/archive4. Unfortunately, the FAC was closed as a result of some issues which needed to be fixed. London is under going a peer review, so please may I ask that, if you get the time, you review the article again and leave your comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/London/archive5?

Thanks, The Helpful One ^(Review) 11:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

SPR - GA

Thank you and congratulations!--Lepeu1999 (talk) 02:28, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Gary, I respect your opinion. Can you take a look at the entry I just made on the talk page of the article? The archived talk section has more back and forth. I have no desire to get into a revert war with this guy and I may be too close to the issue. If you think it's WP:Notable then by all means it should stay in but it needs rewording as it suggests this reenactment group played all the German soldiers in the film. I'd do it, but the editor has made this personal and I don't think he'd accept anything I attempted. He might from someone else.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 02:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!--Lepeu1999 (talk) 12:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Muse awards

Sometime soon. I'm very busy at the moment, and the article could do with a bit of work (the lead needs sourcing and expanding, and I need to replace the unreliable sources that I took out with reliable ones). Most of the work on the article was done by User:Andre666, so maybe you'd like to ask him? Thanks for the reminder, though, it's definitely on my list of things to do. But you know, education calls and all that... :( naerii 14:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow dude thanks. The list needs more sources and could do with a little bit of a cleanup, but I'm sure we can get it to FL status. Cheers :) Andre666 (talk) 16:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC) P.S. Support the Muse Wikiproject!

Well of course you can work on it, I won't have a whole lot of time on my hands anyway seeing as I have college, work and such; I will do my best though, seeing as I did create the article! Look forward to FL status :) Cheers, Andre666 (talk) 19:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Message

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

WilliamH (talk) 16:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Ghost and such

I'm travelling a bit right now, so I prolly won't get to the peer review until the middle of the week. In the meantime;

[22][23][24] some places to look online, but any monkey can look for that; I'll try going through LexisNexis and see if I can find you newspaper/magazine articles to use. Make sure your email is enabled. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 17:13, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I've sent you an email. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 19:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Eh, I think I'm going to be spending more time on some non-video game related topics in the future (Raptor Red, The Wrath of Khan.) But if you whippersnappers ever try and steal my crown, I'll be back :P By the way, in the interests of logrolling, would you be willing to throw down some reviewing goodness at the FAC for Myst IV? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 20:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

GA

Hey, yeah, I did about 60 or so in a month once. And then one GA I promoted was deleted... served me right. Quality over quantity. Anyway, yes, once Matthew takes more of a lead on the FLC stuff I'll be able to head back to GAN. I guess you have some specific articles in mind? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll be happy to move back to GAN for a while. I'll clear my decks and get over there in due course. Cool, looking forward to it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

RATM awards?

Did you know that the List of Rage Against the Machine awards article has been remvoed from the WP:FLC page but the discussion hasnt been resolved yet? lol what's going on? I figured I'd notify you because you're the nominator. REZTER ^TALK ø 21:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

GA review - Victoria of England

Hi Gary, I stumbled upon the article in question the other day, and have been doing quite a bit of work to solve the problems which weren't addressed and led to its failure - would you be able to take another look at the article and see if your concerns are now solved? All of the paragraphs, quotations have been referenced, the citation style is consistent and I removed some unsourcable stuff. It seems a bit of a hassel to list the article afresh when the last review was only 11 days ago, but I will do it that way if you'd prefer. Best, – Toon^(talk) 21:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the feedback! I'll take some more time and have a thorough run through of the article, as it seems a waste to let an article with such potential slip by, and it's come to a pretty good state having had no discernable "main contributor" during its existence. – Toon^(talk) 22:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

FL review - List of The White Stripes awards

Nice of you to think so. I did actually check with The Rambling Man, but I made fundamental error and put it off and recently I haven't been editing that much. But hey, if you think it's there, then I mays as well do it. Red157(talk • contribs) 21:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I've added it and thanks for getting me to do it. Even bigger thanks for all the recent edits you've done on the page. Red157(talk • contribs) 16:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Ghost FAC?

You're liable to run into stability problems with Ghost at FAC, the game is very much in limbo at the moment, even if it seems unlikely that that's going to change in the next few months or at least until SC2 is released. However, don't let that stop you, I'd like to be proved wrong. I'll be on station to work with that peer review. By the way, thanks for re-energising my work with these SC articles, I should have got StarCraft series and Brood War pushed through to GA long ago before deviating off to other things. -- Sabre (talk) 22:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The latest stuff I'm aware of was a presentation at something called DICE (I believe its mentioned in the article), but two or three months back. It basically confirmed that Ghost has not been cancelled, just that it merely is not Blizzard's focus at this time. News is slow on it, but it trickles out from time to time. Perhaps FAC reviewers may feel that its news is slow enough to warrant reasonable stability—at least until/unless the game is reannounced: its liable to use any GA/FA status immediately if/when that happens and we're back to dealing with an ordinary unreleased game. -- Sabre (talk) 23:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

PR topics

Hi Gary, I prefer to review Geography and Natural Science articles (and am listed for those on WP:PRV). I also usually enjoy history and literature too, and review so many different things I am OK with almost any topic. Hope this helps, and thanks for asking, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Featured lists

On Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured list nominations, it says that you only have 21 accepted nominations, but your userpage says 24. Can you just clear it up on the article, Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured list nominations and alls well will ends well. -- K. Annoyomous24_[c] 06:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Message

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

WilliamH (talk) 11:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Bloc Party awards edits

Hi. As i stated in the edit summary i made at the time, there is no need to change all the dates in the article to a different format if their is "no good reason to be doing so", or something along those lines. The retort edit you made only linked back to the same article which i quoted this from, so I don't know why you reverted it. Are you agreeing with me?

We're both looking for quality in any article we edit, so I don't feel there is the need to start an edit war over this. We should leave the dates as they are.

Thanks, ^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 16:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that page in fact links to the above one. This standard is taken for articles at the beginning of their creation. As i have stated now THREE times, there is NO NEED to change the entire page to something else, unless there is a good reason to do so!. Do you not understand? --^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 17:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

It is not a case of that. I was editing other articles, as you have seen, so therefore have not had a chance to reply to your comments. My point was that you were linking me to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) (MOS:SYL), one of the first lines of which is "In June 2005, the Arbitration Committee ruled that when either of two styles [such as 14 February or February 14] is acceptable, it is inappropriate for an editor to change an article from one style to another unless there is a substantial reason to do so. Edit warring over optional styles is unacceptable."

You are beginning an edit war, one which i am being dragged into in order to restore the order stated by this page. Can you simply not see my point? I AGREE with you that the need to fully format dates and years in articles has DEPLETED. I can see that. Contrary to this, my point is that there is no need to go back through every single article on Wikipedia in order to correct this, they are trying to make the point that we should use this standard from NOW on. If you read the above paragraph, it states there is no need to do it unless good reason is provided. Can you see this? Can you provide a good reason?????

In closing, i feel we should agree by a later sentence in the above paragraph - "Where in doubt, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.". Can we find out whatever this standard was, and go by that as a solution to our problem? As this will cause no more arguements. Thanks, ^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 19:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Further to your most recent comment, this user should also follow the statement i have advised to you. There is no need to change an article's entire format of noting dates and years purely from "April 20" to "20 April" unless there is very good reason to.--^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 19:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Wait, i think i understand what your point is, is it that you are not stating a point of changing "April 20, 2007" → "20 April, 2007", you are actually wishing to change it from "April 20, 2007" → "April 20, 2007", without linkage? --^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 19:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC

Ah :) ok now i see. In that case we were confusing two different arguements. Feel free to unlink all the dates! I thought you were simply wanting to change all the dates in the page from "April 20" to "20 April". I don't know how we managed to get this confused for so long...--^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 19:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

←Hey sorry i was off the internet for a couple of hours. Just wondering, why did you go against what we talked about and then just change all the date formats anyway?--^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 21:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

You said that you were simply changing all the dates to remove links, not change all dates from August 14 → 14 August, as i have been arguing all along. This does not need to be done, as i have said to you what feels like a million times now. --^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 02:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

why does it matter if the dates are MDY or DMY if both are standard format? --^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 02:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I can see that dates need consideration now that auto reformatting doesn't take place, but where's the difference between August 14 and 14 August? --^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 02:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

But i AGAIN revert back to the fact that the Wikipedia Manual of Style for Dates and Numbers, ie, the rulebook for around here, states that a user should NOT go through and change every single date to this format as there is no significant reason to do so! you still seem to not understand my point. --^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 03:03, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Where is this quote from? I have been unable to find it. Also, i don't understand, the page itself is named August 14, why change to 14 August? --^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 03:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm going to let this one go on that basis. I don't agree that that counts as a significant need for change, as i - and probably many other users - would say that both standards are acceptable, and there wouldn't be a need for change if one style was already in place. But i can tell that many countless hours have probably been wasted on arguing this, including ours(!), so lets just leave it at that. I'm not on Wikipedia to annoy the other editors so I'll stop fighting the case.

Happy editing :) Ps. Apologies about the sig, i have to keep clicking the button as opposed to typing due to a problem with my keyboard. Its annoying me too...--^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 03:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:GANs

Because I wanted to give User:Orczar, who wrote them over the past year, a motivation to push them to GAs (see my msg to him at User_talk:Orczar#Prehistory_quality). I am afraid it was pointless, he doesn't seem to interact much with anybody... but I believe a gamble like that is worth it, every now and than. Also - in the past, IIRC, he used to reference the articles better: this version had 120+ inline cites. I hoped it would improve...--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I thought GAs may be more of a motivation that the PR. As you know, I am not in a habit of spamming GA with this kind of work, I really wanted to get Orczar motivated to join our community and push for a little more quality - he is active, he works on those articles, it's just... he does it apart from the rest of us. I thought this could help - I really can't think of much more to do with that. PS. As long as we are on the subject of GAs, I still am somewhat unhappy that Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Łódź insurrection (1905)/1 resulted in deslistment. I feel that complains about broadness are unjustified. Do you think it would be a bad move if I just resubmitted the article? It passed, there were votes for keep... the delist consensus was margin wide. How would you've voted? For the record, more details about this event are available in offline, print Polish sources, nowhere else (as far as I can tell). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Interesting: User_talk:Piotrus#GA_etc.. I will certainly reply to him, but I thought you may offer him some advice as well? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Poland in the Early Middle Ages/GA1

You said "References should be placed after any punctuation marks". Is that really your belief on this question? I would agree that Wikipedia:When to cite is a little too loose, but requiring cites after every punctuation mark... goes way too far. Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)}

OH... I'm sorry. I totally misread that.. I thought you were saying that every single punctuation mark should be followed by a reference. Now that would be absurd... My bad. Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 15:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

FAR

Whoops, didn't notice that. (Or did I... This is just my fiendish plan to stall you until I can get more stars.... :D Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 11:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

You liberal you :P Yeah, I've been working on random articles that caught my fancy lately, to the detriment of my own FTCs... :) But hey, this way I won't get pigeonholed as "that video game guy". :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:FT boxes

By the way, this is a bit nitpicky, but you probably shouldn't archive nominations until you're ready to bring the new nomination, as despite all best intentions there's no guarantee you ever will bring the new nomination. Archiving like this isn't common practice and as a result when it is done it looks a little bit odd. Thanks! - rst20xx (talk) 19:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

AXXo

Hi, I am reviewing your article, AXXo, for GA. I have listed some comments on the review page. I do have some reservations regarding the article which, perhaps, you can clear up. Please feel free to contact me with questions or comments. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 21:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Burundi

Finished making the corrections you suggested. Feel free if I need to do some more editing. miranda 00:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Responded

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

06:18, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Prehistory of Poland

What do you mean by "Paragraphs in the lead should be merged"? There seems to be just one leading paragraph.

Orczar (talk) 13:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Prehistory of Poland (2)

Thank you that explains it. Orczar (talk) 18:15, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Vithoba

Hi, you reviewed and passed the article as GA on 14 July, 2008. Since you are used to generating Featured content and have more than 55000+ contributions, i would love to hear your comments on the Talk:Vithoba if the article can pass FAC. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redtigerxyz (talk • contribs) 17:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Muse awards

Why have you center-aligned certain things and not others? The list looks drunk... Andre666 (talk) 18:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

GAN: reviews

A thought: the instructions for reviewers of the GANs include at (5) "Reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to fix problems with the article under review." I wouldn't really care what you do, but a few of your comments would actually take less for you to solve than to list./write them out. Nergaal (talk) 22:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:WP:FT2008

Would that work? To be honest I don't really care about WP:FT2008. If someone wants to see when a particular topic was promoted, they can check that topic's talk page. If someone wants to see which topics were promoted in a particular month, they can check that month's log. WP:FT2008 doesn't work accurately, for example Mitchazenia has promoted a lot of things, but not Guitar Hero. Anyway, if what you are suggesting would work, and that it works in the way I understand you're suggesting, then maybe we should do it as I don't think it would harm anything, and it would just be a back end change - rst20xx (talk) 22:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Ask Arctic gnome first, but you've got my support I guess. Good thinking - rst20xx (talk) 23:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Meshuggah

Greetings Gary King! I see that you usally do not make things like peer reviews, but I would highly appreciate your comments/suggestions/opinion on Wikipedia:Peer review/Meshuggah/archive2. Cheers!--  LYKANTROP  ✉ 12:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Colorado Rockies Opening Day starting pitchers

Thanks for your comments. When you get the chance could you evalute the changes I've made to the article based off of your suggestions? Thanks --Mr.crabby (Talk) 21:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

FLC !voting

Yeah, it's been a while. Now I know what I want to see and think I have a clear understanding of WP:WIAFL, I can't wait to get through the backlog. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Just to let you know, an article you assessed in July (Maria Sharapova) has been put back up for nomination after the concerns you raised were addressed. Musiclover565 (talk) 17:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

2007-08 Pittsburgh Penguins season

This article is currently under Good Article review, if you feel inclined to participate. Thanks, Grsz^talk 19:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Do I just need to add "This peer review discussion has been closed" ? Grsz^talk 19:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

---

Angband (band)

Hello sir, I created an article about Angband, but It was deleted. once the creator claimed they are the first metal band from Iran to sign a deal with a European records company but didnt have enough sources, I have many sources like: www.lordsofmetal.nl , www.stormbringer.at , www.localradio.pehzeh.net www.metal-rules.com and their album has a good feedback, I created a page in my sandbox: User:Spada2/Sandbox would you please take a look at it and the question I have: can I create the page not mentioning the first band thing due to their positive feedbacks? Thanks in advance--Spada2 (talk) 07:48, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Marginalism Supernormal profits WCWM Abnormal profit Implicit cost Average variable cost Return on capital National accounts Lattice QCD Social safety net George Sarton Scott Reeder Gross National Income Digital distribution Gaius Vibius Pansa Caetronianus Commodity Grove (nature) Social sciences Consumption function

Cleanup Heterodox economics Social capital Alastor Merge Sunk cost Utility Long run Add Sources Welfare economics Internal rate of return Economic rent Wikify Post-Keynesian economics Centre Party (Finland) Icelandic horse Expand Canadian Bacon (film) Crisis (economic) International finance

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you please check these out at WP:PR?

Right now, I have List of The Bellflower Bunnies episodes and Family Moving Day up for review. Please leave courteous feedback ASAP. Thanks! --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 22:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Angband (band)

I edited the article and added the refrences, would you please review it and tell me your opinion specially about the sources. Thanks in Advance--Spada2 (talk) 08:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I'm flattered of your warm welcome to me. I will hope to see some minor edits in Wikipedia.NYC43 (talk) 21:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Juliancolton 3: new section

I deleted my accidental dup vote. Thanks for noticing! Bstone (talk) 23:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi

The FAC page for New Year's Revolution (2007) was blanked because of Save Us. Y2J did not know to place it on the waiting list at WP:PW before nominating it. You might want to tell him what to do when he decides to renominate it again. I've never nominated an article for FAC so I can't tell him. He is a fairly new user. Been around for a few months. Just thought to tell you.--WillC 04:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Just thought to tell you.--WillC 04:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Holy crap

I'm getting perilously close to being overthrown. I'd better start working ;-) sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Not until you've went through the hellfire :p sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The dark side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be...unnatural... sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

That made my evening. Now, back to that paper I'm "supposed" to be writing :( sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Like this? I wholeheartedly agree. I don't think my university offers any of those classes though. And on the subject of collaboration, I'm thinking of exporting the topic workshop I wrote for WP:ANIME to other WikiProjects (namely WP:FILM if I'm elected a coordinator or WP:VG). Thoughts? sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, it offers a centralized place at which to tackle topics. I believe most collaborations fail because topics are a very long term prospect, and it's difficult to keep interest going that long. The same problem applies here; however, if there's a place simply to put ideas, see the results as topics get closer and closer to completion, have input on topics from more people, then the chances of the topic being completed are higher. The more people you get involved in a topic, the better your chances of seeing it completed (than the one man crusades you and I are fond of that take absolutely forever). sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Development of Half-Life 2

I think the best course of action we have for this content cut information, which I think you'll agree with me consists mostly of information that is of use only to players and generally requires knowledge from playing the game, is to pick out the bits of relevant development information in the article, write a paragraph on cut content for Half-Life 2#Development and then redirect the article to Half-Life 2#Development. You've probably got a bit more of an impartial eye on HL content than I do, can you see which bits would be good to merge and summarise for the main article? -- Sabre (talk) 17:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Aaron Eckhart

Oh snap, I thought it was redirected by itself. Huh! Thank you for putting it to the main page, appreciate it. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

West Glen Junior School

Just a friendly question on West Glen Junior School. I noticed you removed the merge tag without doing a merge. But I still don't see any claim of this being a notable school (or even references). I wanted to ask what's going on. Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:06, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

List of universities in British Columbia

I just read your latest edit on the article and I'm not sure if you understand the geography of BC:

• UBC is NOT within the City of Vancouver boundary
• Burnaby is NOT part of Vancouver either
• North Vancouver, see above
• Strangely enough, EUCAD is within CoV but was not mentioned
• Sooke is a separate municipality from Victoria
  • UCW does offer graduate (MBA) program--Cahk (talk) 03:42, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

    Ah alright; thanks for making those changes. Gary King (talk) 03:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Awards

Hi Gary. I worked on List of awards and nominations received by the Degrassi franchise some time ago and took it to FLC, although it didn't pass. I'd like to make a second attempt sometime soon. I saw you created {{awards table}}, and {{Infobox Musician Awards}} and I have a few questions.

1. Would {{awards table}} template work there? I see that in the usage the table has four columns. Can five be created?

2. Can a footnotes field be added to {{Infobox Musician Awards}}, as appears in {{Infobox Artist Discography}}?

3. Is it possible to make {{Infobox Musician Awards}} collapsable, as in List of awards won by The Simpsons (that list doesn't currently use the template)?

4. When something has been nominated, but the result is pending, many articles use a table cell looking like:  Nominated*  Can {{won}}'s sister template do something like this, and can you think of a better term instead of "Nominated*"?

5. Finally, if I wanted to two new Awards templates, {{Infobox Television Awards}} and {{Infobox Film Awards}} is it just a matter of copying the Musician Awards one and replacing the music Awards with Awards more relevant to TV and Film?

Hope you can help, regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Gary. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies#Infobox. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 19:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I've created the two templates, and a list of awards I think would be suitable, at User:Matthewedwards/Film and TV awards. However the lists are rather long (55 for each), and probably need cutting down. What do you think? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Gary, dropping by to say what a useful and pleasant addition you were to our NTWW recording today. Thanks for coming and being a good sport. Drop by anytime. Best, Durova^Charge! 05:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will do my best to be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

21:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Church

Hello, you are receiving this message because you voted in the last FAC for this article. Currently, it is undergoing a peer review and I invite you to come view the page and offer any suggestions for improvement here [25]. Over the past three months, the page has been improved with additional scholarly works, trims, two new sections suggested in and attention to concerns raised during the last FAC. Thanks in advance for your time, attention and help to bring this important article to FA. NancyHeise ^talk 23:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Species of StarCraft

Ok, I'll go do that...sorry I forgot. Do you mean literally transclude the review page onto there, or just add a new section that summarizes or links to the review? Thank, —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 16:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and while I'm at it...where does one get the ID# of the reviewed version (to include in the {{GA}} template)? I thought I had put the correct ID number in, but I just noticed that the GA template I put on the talk page is linking to some kind of Pokemon article instead of the reviewed version of Species of StarCraft. —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 16:56, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. I think I had just accidentally added 1 to the oldid I put in the original template. Anyway, thanks for the help! —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 17:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey!

I do have an account, but I tend to only use it when articles are protected. Thank you for the encouragement nonetheless! 98.226.32.129 (talk) 20:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikisource template

Hi, the Wikisource template at Frog Legs Rag (and a few other articles) was created by a Wikisource administrator to be more informative than the old template. As we upload more sheet music and manuscripts to Wikisource we're planning to use it more widely. Best, Durova^Charge! 21:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Food and Drink FA Comment

Hi. I saw the conversation at WT:FAC in which you were feeling guilted into helping out with food articles. Just thought I'd let you know that it's the least represented category at WP:FA, so any help would be greatly appreciated. If you need help choosing an article, you can contact us at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink. We might even be able to help research! :) (was that shameless wikiproject spamming, or what?!) Cheers, Intothewoods29 (talk) 21:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

FLCs

Responded to your concerns at my FLCs. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 04:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

:O You're #3... sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 23:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes

Hi, do you think there is anything else missing? Nergaal (talk) 22:34, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

AXXo

Are you still aggressively working on this article, or should I take it off hold and fail it for now? If you are seriously working on it, I am willing to wait. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 17:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Sig

Does non-Vista/Firefox computers render it as something awful? —sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Better? —sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Dammit. You've induced me to like change it six times. Damn your insistence on good fonts :p —sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 03:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, having the same signature for more than a year induces the desire to change (why is change such a huge topic nowadays anyways?). —sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 03:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

You did it!

List of awards and nominations received by Muse is now a featured list! Nice one man, thanks for all the work you put in :) Andre666 (talk) 05:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The Pirate Bay

I've started reviewing The Pirate Bay and I just wanted to say, from what I have seen so far, it is an excellent article. Please keep an eye on the talk page so you can make any improvements needed. Thanks, Anonymous101 (talk) 20:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I'll start doing the proper reviewing tomorrow. I would do more reviewing today but I'm going to sleep soon.Anonymous101 (talk) 20:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Review  Done. Anonymous101 (talk) 17:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

That was quick. I'll do a final review to make sure the issues have been addressed and there are no more issues, and, if everything is OK, your GA nom will be passed. Anonymous101 (talk) 18:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look at one of your other GANs tomorrow if no one has reviewed them. Anonymous101 (talk) 19:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

oops. Thanks for undoing my edit that broke lots of pages. Anonymous101 (talk) 19:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by The White Stripes

I wanted to go on a break from wikipedia, but in a moment of weakness I notice you've re-submitted the list. Hopefully it's pass this time, despite it being pretty soon after the last one. And thanks again for all the work you've done on it. Red157(talk • contribs) 22:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Lost Planet: Extreme Condition

If you are free can you help this article to get GA?. I can help with finding links and source. Thanks. The article is such a mess. It needs complete do over such has adding gameplay, story, dlc and various other things. --SkyWalker (talk) 07:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

How about Company of Heroes, Race Driver: Grid and FarCry 2?.--SkyWalker (talk) 16:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It is no hurry. I was just pointing out so that one day they will be a GA or FA too. --SkyWalker (talk) 17:03, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes

you probably want to take a look at the discussion there and give your opinion. Nergaal (talk) 14:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:Merging unqualified FLCs into parent lists

Well, I would prefer if they were all merged into one master list. Your question is a tricky one because if the main page doesn't include them, then it would techinically be incoomplete. But if it listed all of the Universities, then that would make the split pages redundant and unnecessary. I suggest you look at List of Medal of Honor recipients for an example as it nearly passed an FLC. I agree with its format, having lists for all of the provinces, then a small summary for the ones with their own pages. Or, alternatively, you could use it as a summary page for the 10 provinces (which would also have its uses) and keep every province with its own page and just accept that some will be too small. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've been tricked by that kind of stuff in the past. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

9.0 live

As you may have seen 9.0 failed FAC again, I think we could re-nom it eventually but it's usually recomended to wait atleast two weeks. I'm gonna nominate PNC Park for FA soon, so either hold off on the Slipknot articles or just leave my name off (I think a person can only have one nom at a time). In the mean time, I'm gonna go on a big search for 9.0 articles, I don't expect to find a lot but there's a few new resources I can use at my school. Blackngold29 04:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:Anime summaries

Go watch The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya, which is an awesome anime :p In any case, if you can get Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film to GA and help me get List of countries by number of Academy Awards for Best Foreign Language Film to FL for a film featured topic with List of Academy Award winners and nominees for Best Foreign Language Film, then I'll consider letting up on the anime episode lists (although I still have a lot of featured topics left...). In any case, off to bed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of micronations/archive2

Hi. The Rambling Man has recently placed some comments, which I have responded to except for one. The "founded" column can be sorted in four different ways, when it should only be two. It seems that Seborga's foundation date as well as the two "unknowns" are causing the problem - do you know how this can be fixed?

Thanks. - Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 15:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It worked, thanks for your help. - Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 17:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Brazilian states by Human Development Index. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 16:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 15:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Response on my talk page

I have responded to you on my talk page. Lightmouse (talk) 14:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Randy Pausch

I'm reviewing Randy Pausch. I decided not to review New York Times as there seemed to be an ongoing edit dispute and I'd like to be 100% sure that all issues have been resolved before reviewing the FAN. Anonymous101 (talk) 14:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Review done. Please see the review page for a list of issues. Anonymous101 (talk) 15:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Featured sound candidates: reform proposal

I'm trying to restart this process again, see Wikipedia_talk:Featured_sound_candidates#Nomination_procedure:_Proposal. Best. --Kleinzach 01:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

FLCon

Thanks for entering. You can now start choosing your topics and lists. However, you will not be able to submit contest related FLCs until October 10 at 20:00 GMT. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Frog Legs Rag

On 3 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frog Legs Rag, 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) 04:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

RE:FLCon

Pick one that you're comfortable with. IMO, I don't know why this is an issue for you since business and economics is one of the categories, and you've done lists in there before. If you want to be adventurous, then go ahead. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Food and drink obviously. ;-) But in all seriousness, it depends on you finding of a good list within each category. Narrow down the field for me if you want me to make a choice though. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 05:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

On this note, can you strike all your comments on my FLCs if they've been addressed? (And commit to a position to save Matthew some sanity :p) — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, if you're now interested in DYKs (at least per the DYK above), you might be interested in Durova's triple crown awards. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 07:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Spore req

Can you post in the Spore (2008 video game) page what the article needs for GA? JAF1970 (talk) 19:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Ontario universities map

{{Ontario Universities Map}}. I hope it's okay. It utilizes Image:Universities in Ontario.svg which I created, and then the text is added at template level. I had initially sized the template with a width of 780px, but then realized it was too big when transcluded. It's now at a more reasonable width of 400px. I've only included the main campuses because it was getting stupid around the Toronto area. Even now there isn't much room for the text. I'm a little unhappy that the text for OCAD overlaps onto the marker for Guelph, but I don't know where else to put it. By all means edit it if you find somewhere.

When transcluding, you can do {{Ontario Universities Map|float=right}} if you want it on the right side of the page, otherwise just leave out the float= field for it to be on the left. I don't know if you can have a caption or not, but I'm sure you'll figure it out!

Let me know if you like it and if you want me to do any others for the other FLCs you've got going on. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Green Day

On 4 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Green Day, 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.

Thank you for your contributions, and all the best for your FLC! - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 22:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Beyoncé Knowles

I was surprised Gary. But I have already dropped a message on the nominators talk page. I think its not yet ready. I saw the comments on the FAC page and will give a "say" there in a moment. Thanks for dropping by. --Efe (talk) 08:57, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by The White Stripes

Just a quick question, how come you removed the list of NME Awards? Red157 (talk • contribs) 13:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Cress Williams DYK

Hi. I've reviewed your DYK submission for the article Cress Williams, and made a comment on it at the submissions page. Please feel free to reply or comment there. Cheers, Olaf Davis | Talk 15:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Looks fine now, thanks. Olaf Davis | Talk 18:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image

I'm actually not sure. I suggest talking to Elco about that, because I haven't boned up on text/logo stuff. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:54, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The logo should prolly be reduced to infobox size (256px). As to the others, they all have detailed rationales, but I'm not sure if the image of Nova is significant enough per NFCC to warrant inclusion. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Um, the logo's full size is 531 × 236 px. I meant to reduce the full image size to 256px. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Just make sure it's standardized throughout. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

aXXo

Don't forget the person who threatened to instantly delist aXXo if it passed! —Mattisse (Talk) 20:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sources at StarCraft: Ghost

Done. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Ghost FAC

I'm game for it. A bit of university work to deal with, but otherwise I should be able to participate. Here's to hoping that the FAC is one of those rare ones when everyone goes "hey, there's actually nothing wrong with this" though! -- Sabre (talk) 15:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever used IRC, to be honest I'm not entirely sure what (or where) it is! Point me at it and I'll enter it. Either way, I've just uploaded a new version of the cinematic shot, hopefully its more valuable to commentary than the previous one which was just a lot of black, without it being entirely clear what the image was. Its a lot better for the commentary on the higher quality of the cut scenes. Thanks for giving that cut scene prose the go-over though, I wasn't entirely happy with the way I'd written it. As for the rest of the prose, I really can't see much more that can be done: you were rather thorough. I don't seem to have the eye for prose issues beyond the glaringly obvious, which is probably why my two previous FAC's (damn you Orange Box) failed, but I'll try my best. -- Sabre (talk) 15:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Just some thoughts: there's nothing in the article on the sequel novel to Nova, Spectres, or on this Ghost Academy graphic novel. However, I'm reckoning that its probably not a good idea to include anything on them at present, as even with DeCandido's ramblings in his blog, there's nothing that would represent a certifiable reliable source for this stuff. However, according to DeCandido, Spectres may be novelising parts of the intended Ghost storyline, which would be significant for the article (lends credit to the idea that the game isn't coming—they did this with Warcraft Adventures—which helps the FAC stability issues, but not the comprehensive bits). I'll let you know if any reliable sources for that come up during the FAC process, as we'd need to integrate that quickly and efficiently if its confirmed. Ghost Academy on the other hand just seems to be a focus more on the training process, rather than anything that impacts on the game that we should mention. -- Sabre (talk) 16:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

A question, since you've got a lot more experience with the FT areas: what happens to the StarCraft titles GT if Ghost gets promoted? Does it automatically become an FT, or does it have to be renominated? -- Sabre (talk) 18:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I've never seen so much copyeditting in one go. Shows how much I don't understand the "brilliant prose" requirement, I can't see anything wrong with it until after other people who do understand it have gone through it... -- Sabre (talk) 21:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Randy Pausch

Now a good article. Congrats. Anonymous101 (talk) 16:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm busy today but I'll probably be able to review The New York Times tomorrow. Thanks, Anonymous101 (talk) 16:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Cress Williams

On 7 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cress Williams, 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.

Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Call of Duty 4 main page request

So, I see you're planning to request Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare for the main page on 06 Nov. Raul ran Midtown Madness on 06 Oct—I'm not sure how strict the "within a month" range is, but it looks like you might need to bump that down to 1 point or -1 point, depending. Pagrashtak 15:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Sources

Done. :-) –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, looks good. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:AC/DC

You're right. I guess the problem is that they haven't released an album since 2000 and a lot of the music awards have popped up since then. Thanks for trying though. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Luke...

You have only begun to discover your power. Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC) Ready yet? :p

Fair enough. And no, I'm not anxious, I'm just checking from time to time while you compile an absurd amount of content contributions. ;-) — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, is there anything at the moment that you feel uncomfortable with going into an RfA? Or that you aren't that experienced in a certain field? As I've said in the past, content contributions do go a long way, and you probably have one of the largest collections on Wikipedia, alongside the template work, CSD tagging, vandal fighting, FAC/FLC/FTC participation, and whatnot. If there's something that you're aiming to get better in, I can help you out (as I'm supposed to :p). If this is just a "wait until I feel like I'm ready" thing, then that's fine also. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

And when you are ready to make a grab for the tools like the power-hungry tyrant you are help spread goodwill throughout the wiki, I'll be more than happy to conom. And Seph's start to this thread made me laugh immensely. :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I will make a note of it ;) Gary King (talk) 02:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Done comparing how superior your contributions are to the state David's and mine were at our RfAs yet? :p — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:45, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

*Rolls eyes* Gary, David had two FAs and five GAs when he was at his RfA. You have four FAs and fifty-seven (!) GAs. I had one FA, twenty-two FLs, two FTs, and six GAs at my RfA. You have thirty-two FLs, six FTs, and one GT. You're a far better candidate right now than either of us were at our RfAs. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:55, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Fossil range

Glad you got it fixed. The sandbox template should not be used in article space; it doesn't do anything that the main template doesn't (except break pages, by the sounds of it!) Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 17:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Techmeme

On 9 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Techmeme, 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) 02:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of universities in Nova Scotia

On 9 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of universities in Nova Scotia, 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) 02:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Pure Steel

Hi, I'm creating a page about this record label please take a look; User:Spada2/psr thanks in advance --Spada2 (talk) 11:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Ghost FAC

Do you think that the FAC is progressing too slowly, and thus may die due to lack of participation? Its almost been three days and so far only one editor has left a support or oppose comment, and three others have made miscellaneous comments that don't go either way. I'm contemplating dropping another note in on WP:VG, asking for some more participation to prevent it from stalling and failing because of lack of interest. -- Sabre (talk) 20:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

See [26] Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 01:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. I did consider putting something like "although Nihilistic and Swingin' Ape were developing the game, the cinematics were developed by Blizzard themselves" or something along those lines, but I couldn't get it to a reasonably short length while still describing whats in the shot. Hopefully the addition of the higher standards of quality than previous SC titles to the caption should be enough. -- Sabre (talk) 16:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't suppose you can come up with a bit of better wording for that "suspended development" stuff in the intro as Randomran suggested? I suppose it is a bit awkward phrasing, but I honestly can't come up with anything better. -- Sabre (talk) 19:11, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

GAN request

Hi Gary, I see that you are a prolific GA reviewer, and that you have some interest in chemical elements given your work on featuring Noble gas. Would you be interested in reviewing iridium, which has been sitting at WP:GAN for a while? --Itub (talk) 08:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, no worries. It is a FAC now in case you are interested. --Itub (talk) 08:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Nintendo DSi

On 9 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nintendo DSi, 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.

Cirt (talk) 09:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Wow, three in 24 hours? You're like a factory! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Veronica Mars

Gary,

Cornucopia and I are going to try to get Veronica Mars to featured article status. Given your experience at FAC, I'd love to have you look over what we have now, and help aggressively copyedit what we've got so far (which just passed GA) in order to get to FA. Feel like taking a look? Jclemens (talk) 16:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Muse awards

Hey dude, just thought I'd let you know that Muse have been nominated for another award. If you want to put it in the article, then go for it. I may do it but do not have time right now. See this link: http://www.festivalawards.com/index.cfm?section=awards.nominees&method=view&year=2008&artistid=561. Cheers mate. Andre666 (talk) 19:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

To be blunt

Have you thought of going through RfA again? the last one seemed pretty back but it's been a while since then. Wizardman 23:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

List of WarCry band members

I already fixed all the mistakes you found on the article. Do you think now it can pass the review to be a Featured List? Rockk3r Spit it Out! 04:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I know, what I mean if, from your own point of view. I know that it needs to be reviewed by other people. Rockk3r Spit it Out! 04:55, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of Adobe Systems mergers and acquisitions

On 10 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of Adobe Systems mergers and acquisitions, 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) 11:22, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

List of universities in British Columbia

Template:BC universities map. Another one where they're all bunched up. This time around Vancouver. I kept the entire map of BC because I figured it is more encyclopedic that way, but I will crop and re-vector if you wish. I should get the Quebec one done by tomorrow, and I noticed your DYK for Nova Scotia. You want one of that too? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:Nova Scotia universities map. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

{{Quebec universities map}} I think that's all that you requested. I'm not sure the best way to do it for List of universities in Canada. The other provinces are very small sections, and I could make the template smaller, but the location dots would be extremely small. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 20:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Final Fantasy VII

Hi. FF7 just recently passed GA status, so I was thinking if we can cleanup FFXIII and later send it to PR, we can get the Final Fantasy titles FT back. You can see here the titles that I think should be included, i.e. removing Mystic Quest and FFX-2, as they aren't part of the main series. So what do you think? The Prince (talk) 23:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

OR is definitely a problem. IP addresses usually ad this, and it is often left unnoticed. I have, however, added the article to my watchlist, and will revert anything I detect as OR. My problems with the articles are: 1. ref 7 doesn't seem to be reliable. It should probably be replaced by another reliable one. 2. I think ref 14 is incorrectly formatted. The {{cite journal}} template, I believe, is the one which should be used. 3. are FF-XIII.net and FinalFantasy-XIII.net reliable? They look like fansites to me. 4. ref 18 ([27]) doesn't show any content, and ref 25 ([28]) is a dead link. 5. Is PSX Extreme reliable? Other than that, it looks okay, but I don't know that much about the game, so I don't know if anything is not as it should be. It's a shame that the game won't be released for Wii (at least as of yet) because that's the only seventh generation console I own. The Prince (talk) 15:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

You mean a reference directly from Square Enix? Then I don't know. If e.g. IGN or GameSpot can be used as a source, I don't think we'll have a problem. The Prince (talk) 18:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I was only able to find one source I knew was reliable: [29]. The list to the right of the page also includes Final Fantasy Anthology, but that is basically just a collection of FFV and FFVI. FF Tactics and Mystic Quest are placed in "Related Final Fantasies", which proves they aren't a part of the main series. FFXII and FFXIII aren't included because I don't think they had been revealed yet. Do you think this is good enough? The Prince (talk) 21:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I remember that discussion. The only thing I can say is that the main series of FF (I-XIII) is common knowledge. It's like the main series of Halo, which includes Combat Evolved-3. The Prince (talk) 21:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

FarCry 2

Hey, Are you interested in helping this article?. --SkyWalker (talk) 11:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

How come anyone can play it now?. The game is not released yet :P. The article needs loads of work not sure who else to ask too. DO you know anyone?. --SkyWalker (talk) 16:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Will do but incase if you have time can you help?.--SkyWalker (talk) 16:05, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK nom

Sorry about not counting the prose correctly. I probably should have gone to bed instead of reviewing DYKs at 2:00 am.... Anyway, I verified the hook. btw, if you want to take that list to FLC, I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard for it to pass. Thingg^⊕⊗ 18:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: FFT FT

Well I would vote support for that topic! Not sure I need to say anything more really - rst20xx (talk) 00:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Owen Thomas (writer)

On 11 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Owen Thomas (writer), 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) 07:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Source

Done, commented on the PR page. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Alright. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, since you left comments on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 2006 Pacific hurricane season, could you take another look if you get a chance? –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

 Done –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:24, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that's fine then. Good luck with the article. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Dustin Moskovitz

On 11 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dustin Moskovitz, 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.

Cirt (talk) 13:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Loanable funds

On 11 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Loanable funds, 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.

– RyanCross (talk) 23:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of universities in Canada

On 12 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of universities in Canada, 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.

Double DYK! Good work. :) – RyanCross (talk) 00:03, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for passing Burundi. Cheers. miranda 05:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Vancouver SkyTrain stations

Please review the sub-title, as it seems most of your concerns have been resolved on that featured list candidate. Thanks. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 07:14, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

The Living End discography

I have replied to your comments on the FLC of The Living End discography, here. Further help would be appreciated, thankyou. kiac (talk) 08:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

This is my point.

This comment is e why I believe non-contributors should be able to nominate. [30] If it meets the criteria it should be featured even if someone is still working on it. In fact if that was so, we should have no topics because every article is never finished. Zginder 2008-10-12T18:54Z (UTC)

BTW: The comment you made on my user page was good, I am not offended. Zginder 2008-10-12T18:54Z (UTC)

Well, what I meant to say is that we are actively working towards a featured topic. It's not like we will never be done. We just completed bringing a few of the topic's articles to GA status, including Final Fantasy 3 and Final Fantasy 7 (a MASSIVE project), and now we're working on Final Fantasy XIII's peer review and now bringing Final Fantasy (video game) to GA status again. Gary King (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

FT

No problem. It's just that I, like you, have a liking for FT nominations. And I hope you restore the GA to the Final Fantasy article, that topic has too many FAs to be ignored. igordebraga ≠ 19:05, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

FF Video game development article

If you are doing a development article just for the original game, I think the article should be renamed since it says its the history of all of final fantasy at the moment, otherwise it needs to be greatly expanded and have a link from Final Fantasy articles development section. Please disregard if you already knew this :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

My VH1 Music Awards?

When deleting the My VH1 Music Awards section from List of awards and nominations received by Dave Matthews Band you wrote only that those four awards are "non-notable." In my judgment, that's just not so. Each year's event was covered by Rolling Stone, Entertainment Weekly, etc., so we can see that the media believed the awards to be notable. You can find acknowledgements of winning the award on entries for Bon Jovi, The Corrs, Mýa, Christina Aguilera, Lil' Kim, Nelly Furtado, Lenny Kravitz, Backstreet Boys, and Eminem. (I'm sure there are more, but I got sick of typing.) So we can see that this is sufficiently notable to make the cut on many well-known artists' entires. Dave Matthews Band heavily promoted their nomination and victory via their website [31] [32], press releases, e-mails to fans, etc., so we can see that the band themselves consider this notable. In short, this mention meets WP:GNG; as merely a section, though, it needs only meet WP:NNC, a far lower bar that surely you'll agree is reached here. --WaldoJ (talk) 01:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Dave Matthews Band's 2001 wins are described in Entertainment Weekly, and their 2000 win is described by MTV. There is a great deal more press coverage but, unfortunately, most of it is behind various paywalls now.--WaldoJ (talk) 02:22, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Largest cities of the European Union by population within city limits

I know you did; I watched it in realtime! Thanks muchly! Garden. 17:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Might I ask how you did this so quickly? Garden. 17:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah! That will save loads of time! Thanks a lot, again! :D Garden. 17:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by AC/DC

On 14 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by AC/DC, 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.

Keep up the good work! ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 12:43, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Sources

Done. Sorry for the delay, I didn't see your previous note. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Musing

I find it strangely ironic and awesome that a professor at my school won the Nobel Prize in Economics when I am writing up the Nobel laureates in Economics list for the FLC contest. Oh, and since you've gained an interest in DYKs, I have a new goal for you. Become the first Wikipedian to successfully get this award. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:27, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

"Some time"? That's nonsense. At the rate you're producing DYKs, you'll have the award in no time. I'll be happy with the 15-15-15 award (if anyone can ever get around to reviewing Shikamaru Nara that is). Oh, and you're really gunning to take me down, eh? My ability to work on articles is hampered by midterms right now :p — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC) If you're wondering why I divulged that important piece of information, it's to encourage you to surpass me so you can get over this ridiculous notion you have that you need to beat me and David at FLCs and FACs before you can go to RfA. *sigh* And so I can get some peace of mind after you pass in a landslide *knock on wood*

artist award page names: discussion/apology

Hello there. I saw some artist award pages that you had created were in the format "List of awards and nominations received by [artist]", and changed two of them to the format "List of [artist] awards and nominations", as I thought this was more of a "standard" way. However, another user recommended that I should discuss it with you as the creator (or perhaps WP:MUSIC) first. I see that (s)he is right and so I thought I should talk to you first. Sorry if I've acted rashly in moving these two articles.

Do you have a strong opinion in favour of either of these namespacing options for awards/nominations pages? I am actually neutral on the matter, and was really only moving the articles to achieve consistency with other pages in Category:Lists of awards by musician. Again, my apologies if i've acted over-hastily. Best, tomasz. 22:00, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, possibly a little clunky-looking, on reflection, but i have done as you wished. Presumably we'll now move all the "List of [artist] awards and nominations" to the longer format? tomasz. 11:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:HL2 eps

Looks good to me. If you want to notify the previous participants, go ahead - rst20xx (talk) 23:47, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by The Strokes

On 16 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by The Strokes, 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) 07:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Four year anniversary!

It's been four years to the day since my first edit on Wikipedia (October 15, 2004). Gary King (talk) 03:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Wow!!! Congrats! You surely have accomplished a lot in your time here! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 04:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Congrats. Now go take the plunge already you wimp ;-) — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Um I have to ditto the above... « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:05, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thirded, if that's a word... –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Fourthed. — [ roux ] [x] 18:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

RfC/U

There is currently an open Request for Comment on User Conduct here, regarding G2bambino. As someone with past interactions with him, you are invited to comment. — [ roux ] [x] 15:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Ha, sorry, didn't mean to scare you! — [ roux ] [x] 17:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I contacted just about everyone who has left a comment on his talkpage in the past year, to ensure there is a reasonable cross-section of people invited to comment. — [ roux ] [x] 17:41, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:Ghost is FA!

Yay! A FA and a GA on the same day for me! It is a good day! Although the article (and the other ones promoted today by Sandy) haven't been given stars yet, and the discussion is still open. I presume The Painful Bot of FA Death (Gimmebot) will do that, right?

Doesn't look like the HL2 FTC is going to pass any more though, just to put a crimp on an otherwise fine day, guess we may end up needing OpFor, Blue Shift, Decay and the HL series articles at GA afterall. -- Sabre (talk) 15:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd pitch in for a HL series topic, I want to rewrite Half-Life: Opposing Force and Half-Life: Blue Shift at some point. -- Sabre (talk) 17:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it would be too ambitious, and its certainly something that needs to be done eventually. They're a blight on the face of the otherwise GA and FA HL articles. Opposing Force and Blue Shift are both expansion packs, and thus shouldn't need as much work as the full games and the HL2 episodes. The Half-Life series article will need more extensive redoing, but shouldn't be too hard to develop to the same levels as Halo series and StarCraft series. Decay may need to be merged into Half-Life series, as I don't think it has the same level of coverage as the others. That then just leaves the extra HL2 articles, which could then be merged into Half-Life series if enough real-world info isn't available. It would take a very long time (I promised I'd try and clear up the Total War articles somewhat, I'm going to move to them after I've got most of my immediate scope to GA, but as I said, I do want to get around to OpFor and Blue Shift), but the end result would certainly provide a far more solid FTC than one based on titles only under HL2. -- Sabre (talk) 18:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

And I'll be there to hinder... I mean, help you all every step of the way. :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:19, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK

Dear Gary King, you have a query regarding your recent Did you know nomination. Please respond here. Thank you. -- How do you turn this on (talk) 16:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Stalker

{{o rly}}. Or I just have that template on my watchlist. :-) –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

RE:Requesting peer review

I notice HL2 E1 is up at FAC. I'm trying to finish up some articles for Version 0.7 right now. But after October 20th I'll try to comment on it. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC))

Wow...

I'm being overwhelmed. Well, I can go back to studying for midterms (which I should be doing in any case, and go to sleep to enjoy the Princeton-Brown football game tomorrow). — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 07:09, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Soundgarden

Yes i'm a Soundgarden fan, why do you ask! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 16:36, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Thats okay. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Nirvana

On 18 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Nirvana, 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.

Victuallers (talk) 18:31, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Vancouver SkyTrain stations

Please review the sub-title, as it seems most of your concerns have been resolved on that featured list candidate. Thanks. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 22:33, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi Gary.. per our convo on IRC, could you cast your critical eye over Canadian heraldry? Peer review linked from the talk page. Is there any article in particular you'd like me to review? I don't think I should really do anything at FAR, but I'd be open to anything at GAN. [ roux ] [x] 22:35, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll take Metroid Prime 3... I've almost beaten the game so at least I know something about it! I'm having an early night, but I'll be able to get to it tomorrow. Cheers. [ roux ] [x] 02:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Watchmen FAR

I've posted my revision in the main article space. Please share your thoughts at the FAR page. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

List assessment

Hey there Gary King, I saw your working a list of awards and nominations received by Ne-Yo and did the assessment on the talk page. I was wondering if you could assess list of awards and nominations received by Chris Brown, as I am not too familiar with assessing lists. DiverseMentality^(Boo!) 06:54, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay done Gary King (talk) 06:57, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. DiverseMentality^(Boo!) 07:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Sources

 Done –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Dave Matthews Band

On 19 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Dave Matthews Band, 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.

Keep up the good work! ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 16:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

List of awards and nomiations

I had a discussion with another user on this, and I'd like your opinion. I'd like to create "List of championships won by" for professional wrestlers. It's the same thing as your lists, only for wrestlers instead of artists. The user was against this, citing Wikipedia:Content forking as the reason why, and I was wondering - shouldn't the List of awards and nominations articles violate WP:CF? If not, I see no reason why the "List of championships won by" articles shouldn't be created. If so, then the "List of awards and nominations" shouldn't exist. What do you think about this? Why don't you comment here - to keep the discussion together. (I'll watchlist your page). iMatthew (talk) 00:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

How is it content forking? It's not trying to show a different point of view of a subject or anything. All of the awards and nominations are objective; they are either received or they are not. Probably the most important thing to remember is that separate awards and nominations pages should be created only if there are at least ten awards and/or nominations, otherwise it's probably best to keep that information in the parent article. Gary King (talk) 00:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

So would you say that a "List of championships won by" article should only be created if the wrestler has won a championship ten or more times? iMatthew (talk) 00:52, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes Gary King (talk) 00:55, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Gorillaz at Template talk:Did you know

I've verified the article and will get to work on the other ones. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 04:42, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Could you take a look at List of awards and nominations received by Coolio in Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded on October 18? Cunard (talk) 04:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Could you take a look at List of awards and nominations received by Akon in Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded on October 18? Cunard (talk) 05:12, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I've verified all your articles from October 14 – October 20, 2008. Nice job! I enjoyed reading all your articles. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 05:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

FLC overload?

You may be interested in this thread. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 11:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Gary, could you please wait until most of your current FLCs close before nominating any new ones (not including the FLCon)? Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 14:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by David Bowie

Hi Gary, thanks for your comments at the FLC for List of awards and nominations received by David Bowie. I've added some comments. Cheers --JD554 (talk) 20:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

List of Australian Football League grounds FLC

I have fixed all of the references and the prose of the article. I believe it now meets the criteria for FL. Can you please look over it and comment on it again please?

C4v3m4n (talk) 23:41, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 2007 Pacific hurricane season

Ping... –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:32, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for ImageAmerica

On 21 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article ImageAmerica, 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.

Cirt (talk) 17:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for John Angus Weir

On 21 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Angus Weir, 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.

Cirt (talk) 23:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Contest Invitation

Hello there!

You have been invited to enter C4v3m4n's Contest!.

The contest is designed to provide users with a challenge while still having fun! This month's contest is focused on Movember, a month designed to to raise awareness and funds for men's health issues, such as prostate cancer and depression in Australia and New Zealand.

Follow the link given above to find out more information. Hope to see you there!

${\mathfrak {C}}{\mathfrak {4}}{\mathfrak {v}}{\mathfrak {3}}{\mathfrak {m}}{\mathfrak {4}}{\mathfrak {n}}$ 04:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for John A. Pollack

On 22 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John A. Pollack, 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) 09:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for BuzzTracker

On 22 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article BuzzTracker, 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) 09:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Adscape

On 22 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Adscape, 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.

Jamie^☆S93 14:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Max Blouw

On 22 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Max Blouw, 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.

Jamie^☆S93 14:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Signature

I was going to start a new section, but why spoil a good trend?? :D Yep, I stole your code, I hope you don't mind. I felt I needed a change. :D Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

ZOMG IMITATORS! JulianColton (talk) 19:29, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Uh-oh! Gary King (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Kate Nash

On 23 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Kate Nash, 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.

Cirt (talk) 02:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Beck

On 23 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Beck, 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.

Cirt (talk) 02:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Ne-Yo

On 23 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Ne-Yo, 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.

Allen3 ^talk 11:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of acquisitions by Hewlett-Packard

I think I have addressed your concerns. Could you please look at it again? You can response here. Thanks —Chris! _ct 20:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of North Melbourne Football Club coaches

Any chance, you'd be able to look over this article and comment on it please? Any help would be greatly appreciated. C4v3m4n (talk) 23:33, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

RE:FLC

I have fixed all of the comments you have made. Any chance you could check it over again please? C4v3m4n (talk) 00:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Guns N' Roses

On 24 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Guns N' Roses, 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.

Royalbroil 00:50, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

Sure go ahead - thanks for asking, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 10:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reference check on a few short articles please

Done.

P.S. It's amazing how long your talk page gets after just a couple days! :-) –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 13:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Katy Perry

On 24 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Katy Perry, 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 16:12, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Barenaked Ladies

On 25 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Barenaked Ladies, 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.

Thank you for your contributions, and all the best for your FLC! - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 04:49, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

:O

I've been dethroned. Now, stop flooding up WP:FLC and go after this guy here ;-) Cheers, — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 10:27, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by The Notorious B.I.G.

On 25 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by The Notorious B.I.G., 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) 11:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

dts template

I don't know if you have it on your watchlist, but I have added a comment at: Template_talk:Dts#Compatibility_with_WP:DATE. Regards Lightmouse (talk) 13:33, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Bits and bobs

I apologise if this comes off as a bit presumptious, but I thought I'd ask about the Episode One FAC. You've not editted to it or the article for a while, and there's still some outstanding issues from Guyinblack. Are you still working on it, as its liable to be failed if Guyinblack's issues aren't addressed. I've dealt with a few of them, but I really don't want to become very involved in editting that article, as I want to push on with the Half-Life expansions—Decay is now at GAN by the way, I'm moving onto Blue Shift. If you're still working on Survivor and Lost Coast, we may get all the articles up to quality at a quite a good rate. -- Sabre (talk) 17:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Coolio

On 25 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Coolio, 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.

Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} Ici pour humor 21:24, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, looks like there's been a mistake. The DYK next update page states that it's you who needs to receive the credit for this specific article. I've changed it now. Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} Ici pour humor 21:42, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Akon

On 26 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Akon, 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.

Royalbroil 05:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for SearchFox

On 26 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SearchFox, 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.

Royalbroil 05:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Gwen Stefani

On 26 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Gwen Stefani, 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.

Keep up the good work! ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 11:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Matchbox Twenty

On 26 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Matchbox Twenty, 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) 17:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Gorillaz

On 26 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Gorillaz, 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) 17:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Busy for 10 to 14 days

Hey Gary, so far I've been able to keep up with your torrent of FLCs and newly minted lists, but I will be be very busy starting tomorrow. I may not be able to resume my normal reviewing pace for at least 10 days, so hopefully there are plenty of others for you to turn to. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Reflinks spelling mistakes

Hi, this isn't a major problem by any means, but Reflinks has a spelling mistake that bugs me every time I use it. When running it, the line ""title" yeilds: [u'THE WORLD ECONOMY']" has a spelling mistake; "yeilds" should be "yields" :) Gary King (talk) 21:41, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, I've corrected that as well some other spelling mistakes. Hopefully it wouldn't be happening as frequently with the new spellchecker in VI. — Dispenser 17:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and nominations received by Radiohead

On 28 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and nominations received by Radiohead, 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) 02:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Straw Poll

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll in selecting five proposals before an RFC in which it will be against the current main page. You're input would be appreciated. ChyranandChloe (talk) 22:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in this poll. I just wanted to drop a note to inform you that the wrong version of my design was placed in the poll. The current version is here. The differences may or may not affect your decision. Regards, لennavecia 02:56, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just to let you know some of the concerns you expressed at my proposal have been rectified. You may wish to find out what has changed. Pretzels^Talk! 17:27, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

You owe me... :P

...so when you get a chance, could you put your two cents down at Myst V: End of Ages peer review here? Thanks for any help, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 19:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Vithoba

In Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Vithoba, an editor expressed concerns about "the lack of coherence and a lack of topic sentences". I wanted someone to examine the article for this. I have added some new sentences, and i am so familiar with the article, i just can't see the faults anymore. Since you are an experienced wiki-editor with so many FAs and also the GA reviewer, i thought you are the perfect person to examine the article with an unbiased eye and point out the faults if any. Please look at the article again and tell me if transition sentences or topic sentences are needed anywhere. Thanks. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:17, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, are you free to revisit Vithoba? Please reply.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Would you please elaborate "spaced en dashes and inconsistent inline citation formats" so i fix them, if possible with an example and what needs to be done. Thanks. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Is the inconsistent inline citation formats problem resolved? Can you point more spaced en dashes instances, i am confused where it's spaced and where it is not. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:19, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

what about 1089–1172? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

So now is it OK? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Now the Vithoba FAC is closed, do you know any editor, who could go through the article. A good critic, if possible. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:36, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you know any efficient copyeditors you have come across (OR a list of volunteers), except User:Finetooth who has copyedited Vithoba once? Need a new eye. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I do not know of such a list. Can you please provide a link? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Copyeditors? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Didn't notice. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Topic workshop

As many of your potential topics are films, feel free to propose them at the Film project's topic workshop. Cheers, — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 04:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Steve Vai awards

I found information about it and want you to create a awards list. Cannibaloki 06:15, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, no problem. Cannibaloki 14:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:Julian

Wow, that came out of nowhere. What happened? Anyway, It does have opposition, so I'll note at the bottom that the nominator is on wikibreak, then remove it next time the GimmeBot runs. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

The 25 DYK Medal

		The 25 DYK Medal
		I hereby award The 25 DYK Medal to Gary King for his fantastic work and contributions to the Did you know project. Gary, you've created/expanded over 25 DYK articles in the month of October of this year (2008) alone, and you've already shown you are not just dedicated to featured and good articles, but now did you know articles. You've done great things for DYK so far, and I hope you continue your fine work in that area. Your DYK articles on various topics have helped Wikipedia very much, and we appreciate your work. I'm sure you won't stop here. Your contributions have really impressed me. I hope to see you around DYK! Yours, – RyanCross (talk) 07:20, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Changeling

Hey, thanks for the back slap. That means a lot coming from someone with so many Featured Topics, Lists and Articles under his belt. There aren't many more like it that I can claim almost sole authorship for (maybe State of Play (film)), but I do look forward to submitting Changeling as my first FA and reacting with slowly mounting horror as my eyes scan someone else's five-page list of issues with it. :) All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 14:25, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Softimage

When did MicroSoft buy Softimage?. Autodesk brought them for 38M$.--SkyWalker (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh i did not see that part. Just few days back AutoDesk sent a press release that they have brought the rights for the software. So after i saw you adding the template i was confused. I never knew Softimage was brought by Microsoft.--SkyWalker (talk) 15:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Half-Life

Yeah, I'm still doing GA reviews. I'll take a look at it. I was reading the article the other day and I thought it was fine. If those are the only sources you can find, then I guess that works. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey Gary, I have a question, are the dates in the references supposed to be linked or not? What I mean is like, ex: accessdate "2008-10-31", which are then linked automatically. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Featured list request

Could you do me a huge favour and give List of StarCraft media a look-over for me, and possibly copyedit the introduction? I'd like to bundle it off to FLC sometime soon, but I have absolutely no experience of featured lists. Your credentials here seem to speak for themselves, 56 featured lists tends to suggest you know what you're doing with them. Good work on the Episode One FAC by the way, that's one less to worry about! -- Sabre (talk) 21:21, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

That was quick! Thanks! No other problems with the rest of the list? -- Sabre (talk) 21:55, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:Next FLC for Contest - Yes. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:58, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

The Special Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		For singlehandedly (well, almost) creating and turning List of awards and nominations received by Gorillaz into a featured list in just 12 edits. Impressive and inspirational. - kollision (talk) 11:21, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Wilfrid Laurier list

Hi Gary. Of course the list will never be complete, even in terms of including all "notable" people who ever went or taught there. All I'm looking for is something to show that you've explored sources outside Wikipedia to find further names to add, if any - e.g. the Dictionary of Canadian Biography might have some names of potentially notable people; the main Canadian newspapers might have some obituaries of former students/faculty; I'll leave it to you whether people such as him, him and him (found on a quick Google search) are notable enough to merit a short article. I'm not expecting perfection, just something other than "this list is comprehensive because it has all the faculty/alumni articles that Wikipedia has to offer". I see that the list now has all the chancellors and presidents blue-linked, so well done for that. I'm sure with a little bit more effort, I'll be happy to support. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 15:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

GAR

Hi Gary, I've just noticed a problem with the transclusion process for GAR reviews. Since these subpages are not part of the main article talkpages, changes at these talkpages will not appear in the watchlist of the normal editors of the page. I had no idea that amino acid or protein were up for GAR until they were delisted, and would have had no problem dealing with the requests for references. (I've just dealt with amino acid for example). Could you put a note on the article talkpage in future, explaining what is going on? The addition of the link diff isn't something that grabs people's attention. All the best Tim Vickers (talk) 19:06, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a more explicit edit summary would work, like "This article has been listed for Good Article Review"? I'm a bit annoyed with myself for missing this, since it only took 15 mins of work to add the refs but the article will now have to go all the way through GAN again. Oh well. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of mergers and acquisitions by Expedia

On 3 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of mergers and acquisitions by Expedia, 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.

thx Victuallers (talk) 22:46, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Nested refs

{{#tag:ref|ref 1 text<ref>{{cite foo}}</ref>}}

That's the format for nested refs. You can add a |group=bar after the </ref> if you're using ref groups. [ roux ] [x] 22:57, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Could you help me?

Could you make, kind of a copy edit, and tell me of any mistakes you might find in the lead of Iron Maiden discography. This one is located in my sandbox, because I didn't want to put it on the actual article until it was fixed, so that people wouldn't revert the change. It'll just take a sec. and the mistakes you might find, could you please write them on the section "Mistakes of Iron Maiden discography" and I'll fix'em a.s.a.p. Thanks Rockk3r Spit it Out! 01:27, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Scene 7

You've made a good start in the right direction. It's much improved. I still have concerns though. First, if the article is about the company, it really should describe what the company actually did in the lead and not so much the merger. You should mention the merger in the lead but it shouldn't be the focus of the lead. The subject of the article should be the primary focus. Second, when you say "the website" under the company section my first reaction is "what website?" because you never mentioned a website earlier. Second, it's really not clear as to whether Scene7 was really it's own company but a division that was bought and sold among various companies numerous times. It looks like they were a division of Autodesk and then Broderbund. After that the language is a bit murky in this sentence "Broderbund eventually spun off the company as GoodHome.com in June 1999, which received US$30 million in venture capital from Hearst Interactive Media." I'm not sure what there status was there up until they were acquired by Adobe. Finally, I'm still not entirely convinced about notability. Other then the Daily Deal article, which I can't see, the articles appear to primarily be about the acqquisition of Scene 7 by another company. It would be good to find at least one article online that is about the company itself and what the company was actually doing. Otherwise I would say there aren't enough independent sources where Scene7 itself was the primary subject of the article to make the company notable.Nrswanson (talk) 17:54, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

The O.C. (season 4) FLC

I know you are busy (what with 11 current FLC's to look after!), I was just wondering if you could take another look at The O.C. season 4 FLC again. I have addressed all of your points there and done some more copyediting. I would appreciate any further comments, and to know if you are still opposing this. Many thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Faith Leech

Hi Gary. Could you explain why you think that the last two phrases that you cited are wrong? Also I think that the errors are not representative of the rest of the article, as I don't usually have obviously missing words like that. Thanks. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 00:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK Scene7

Your Scene7 DYK nom is being held up and would benefit from a comment. -- Suntag ☼ 05:08, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Some references that might be of use: Canadian Corporate News, Revolution, Wireless News, Telecomworldwire, internetnews.com, San Jose Mercury News, Telecomworldwire, and Print Week. -- Suntag ☼ 05:28, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of mergers and acquisitions by Dell

On 5 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of mergers and acquisitions by Dell, 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 10:29, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of mergers and acquisitions by Red Hat

On 5 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of mergers and acquisitions by Red Hat, 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) 14:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of mergers and acquisitions by Condé Nast

On 5 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of mergers and acquisitions by Condé Nast, 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) 19:48, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Triple crown awards

It will take you some time to get the Genghis Khan edition conquest of the wiki world triple crown? Nonsense. You're already one DYK away and less than a month has passed. :p Congrats. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Holy crap, that's impressive. On that note, this is appropriate:

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For the absolutely incredible quantity of quality content you have created, and your dedication to the project. Also for eclipsing me here and becoming the first person to obtain the Genghis Khan edition conquest of the wiki world triple crown. You've made your coach proud. Now run already dammit. ;-) — sephiroth bcr (converse) 18:29, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

RE:Wikipedia:Peer review/Metroid Prime 3: Corruption/archive2

Looks like I missed the peer review again. I'll try to read the article and leave comments at its FAC this weekend. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:31, 5 November 2008 (UTC))

DYK for Scene7

On 6 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Scene7, 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.

—Politizer ^talk/_contribs 03:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of mergers and acquisitions by Microsoft

On 6 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of mergers and acquisitions by Microsoft, 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.

cheers Victuallers (talk) 20:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Days from now

Hey, I've been using Template:Days from now and I noticed the other day that you changed it so it no longer counts individual days, but months. I was wondering if there was any particular reason for that. Thanks, and congrats on all those good and featured articles I see you've amassed! ShadowUltra (talk) 23:35, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up, that sounds like a better system. ShadowUltra (talk) 02:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:List of premiers of Canadian provinces

I haven't worked on those in a while, but they are still in my long term goals. I've looked for good references for all of them, and if they aren't there, then we have to look deeper than a Google search and looking over the websites of the provincial governments. Check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Government of Canada/first ministers, where I keep track of how those lists are doing, in hopes of eventually getting an FT. In that table I have listed which tables have references, which list the premiers' ridings, which match the common format used by the list of prime ministers, etcetera. I'm willing to get back to work on them if I won't be the only one at it, and we can use the talk page of that table to discuss progress. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that one is a bit behind. I see these lists (and others like them) as a two-step process. First, we have to make all of the tables look good and have a matching format, which is mostly busywork, the NWT list falls into that category. The second is getting references and photos that aren't online, which I've been looking into lately. Next time I go to Toronto I'm going to spend some time in the archives scanning old PD photos. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 21:07, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

List of PGA Championship champions

I have addressed all your comments at the FLC, thanks for your comments, there very much appreciated NapHit (talk) 00:15, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Gary Hendrix

On 8 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gary Hendrix, 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 07:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gary

Hi Gary,

My name is Alan Feldman. I've been a Symantec watcher for a while now and have been updating the Symantec mergers and acquisitions list for the past year or so now. Symantec just released publicly its purchase price for its recent nSuite Technologies acquisition via its quarterly 10-Q report. I went to update the acquisition price on the wiki page from its dash to the newly announced purchase price and was quite surprised to find not only the entire entry had been deleted but several other important acquisitions had been removed as well.

I just got finished restoring those missing entries over the last hour or so but I thought it would be a good idea to open up a dialogue with you so that we may discuss any differences in opinion.

I enjoy keeping the world at large up-to-date on the ongoing many acquisitions made by this company and would like to work with you so that we may share a common vision for this wiki entry.

Thank you and regards,

 Alan Feldman

Alanfeld (talk) 23:31, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your reply Gary. It is a pleasure to meet you. I am still very, very new to this Wikipedia phenomenon, but it is quite exciting.

Ah yes, I had not actually seen the Discussions page of the very article I had been helping keep up-to-date over the last few months until earlier this evening. I'm glad I discovered it earlier so that by the time I read your message on my user page just now I was actually able to already be familiar with what you were referring to with the prior submission to the Featured List.

I will do my best to help keep that article up-to-date in the future and please feel free to give me suggestions as to proper Wikipedia etiquette and best practices and that sort thing because like I said I am still very new to this Wikipedia environment. Cheers! Alanfeld (talk) 03:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for demand shock

On 10 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article demand shock, 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.

Royalbroil 03:23, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK recognition

FWIW, you probably should list yourself at WP:DYKLIST. Cheers, — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 09:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Irish ODI cricketers

Hi, I'm just letting you know that I think I've addressed your concerns on the FLC for ODI cricketers for Ireland and was wondering if you wanted to take a look and see if you agree. Nev1 (talk) 21:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reference check

Yep,  Done –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:31, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

–Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Request for adminship

Whadda you say Gary? iMatthew 00:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I would co-nom :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 01:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

As would I. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

;) iMatthew 01:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe some other time. Peer pressure doesn't work on me! :) Gary King (talk) 15:45, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Grrr. iMatthew 15:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Once everyone I know becomes an admin themselves, then I'll think about running :D Gary King (talk) 16:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

You probably should be an administrator, Gary - if nothing else, it would save you having to use {{editprotected}} on the MediaWiki space talk pages all the time! I do hope it's not because you're concerned you wouldn't pass (as of course you would). fish&karate 16:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Of course he would. iMatthew 16:16, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

PEER PRESSURE --Golbez (talk) 16:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

ADMIN COACH PRESSURE (for like the 50th time). — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 17:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

← I will be ready when I'm ready :D Gary King (talk) 17:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Wiki-wise - you're MORE than ready. iMatthew 17:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Jeez. Gary can be so selfish sometimes, just sitting there with his featured topics and lists piled about him like swag... :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 17:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

As well as crushing me and all of Wikipedia with his featured lists. ;-) — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Also, Gary, you've had nine people offer to nominate you at various instances: me, Giggy, David, Rambling Man, Realist2, Matthew, Gonzo, Julian, and Wizardman. That and another half-dozen offer support if you ever ran. Do you need any more confirmation? — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:52, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, I'll make the matching sweatshirts so we can be Gary's Gang. Or Cabal, if alliteration isn't your style :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 00:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I can be an informal admin if you guys want, and you can call me an admin. I just don't actually have any special powers :p Anyways, if I ever do run, I'd need to allocate a week for that – just in case! Gary King (talk) 03:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Pshaw, if you won't man up to accepting your destiny, you don't get to be called admin! *Goes to frivolously derail all Gary's featured content nominations in spite* Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 03:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I think you deserve this...

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For the four additional featured lists that you helped to create (to add to the countless others that you have already created), I hereby award you this barnstar. I think you are more than deserving of this award. —ŁittleÄlien¹8² 03:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

List of Prince Edward Island General Assemblies

I hadn't looked at the Newfoundland material yet. However, besides the series you mention there is also:

• [33] which goes from 1843 to 1846
• [34] which goes from 1833 to 1841

from the same source. You might find some more info at

• Elections Newfoundland
• Newfoundland and Labrador Heritage
• Digital initiative - Memorial University - seems to have lots of material and a fair bit online; not sure what all they have

I find that I have to resort to non-online history books or the Canadian Parliamentary Companion (more recent editions not online as far as I know) on occasion. If I do come across other stuff, I will try to keep you in mind. --Big_iron (talk) 11:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You might be interested in this page [35] about Newfoundland premiers at Marianopolis College; there also seems to be some other information about Newfoundland history there. --Big_iron (talk) 12:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, the election dates from 1949 to 1999 are at the Elections Newfoundland link mentioned above. Also, according to [36], there were no elections or assemblies from 1934 to 1949. --Big_iron (talk) 11:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Here is something that might help for part of that:

A History of Newfoundland from the English, Colonial and Foreign Records by D. W. Prowse

It is available via Google books at [37]. I got some hits searching for "election" or "elections". However, Google Books doesn't appear to show all the pages. The full content is available at [38] but searching this book at that site by keyword doesn't seem to work well. There is a chapter "Chronology, Justiciary, and House of Assembly" which has lists of people elected by riding by period up to the 1880s. --Big_iron (talk) 16:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

List of premiers of the Northwest Territories

I'm not sure that William McDougall was the first governor but that it's possible Adams George Archibald was. If you look at Northwest Territories#History it says that the territory was created in June 1870 but McDougall had resigned almost a month earlier in May 1870. McDougall's article says, "He also continued to serve as an interim leader of the Northwest Territories provisional government from Ottawa until Adams George Archibald, took over on May 10 1870." That's confusing due to the use of the name Northwest Territories prior to the creation of the territories. He had, however, been the governor of the North-Western Territory. Also in the Archibald article it states that "Cartier asked Archibald to become the first Lieutenant Governor of Manitoba and the Northwest Territories." CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 03:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That's a bit odd as the Rupert's Land article also says it didn't go out of existance until July 1870. However, a bit of interesting material is there as it also says, "On 19 November, 1869 the Hudson's Bay Company sold Rupert's Land to the newly formed Canadian Government for £300,000. Control was originally planned to be transferred on December 1 of that year, but due to setbacks caused by the Red River Rebellion, the government assumed control on 15 July, 1870. The region then became known as The Northwest Territories." Also if you follow the link on from the one you gave me to this and look at the fourth paragrah from the bottom it says, in part, "...many authorities feel that he never was Lieutenant Governor of Rupert's Land and the Northwest Territories and do not name him as such." One of those things and I guess it depends on how you look at it. The only reason I noticed was because of the nomination and I thought it better to ask you directly because I might have been missing something, and didn't want to cause problems with the nomination. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 03:51, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi there again.

Some days ago I asked you to copy edit an article's lead (Iron Maiden discography) located in my sandbox, you fixed al the mistakes. When I updated the actual article with the new lead, it got me into an edit war against User:Cannibaloki. Thankfully all the differences and arguments among both of us (Cannibaloki and me) are over now. The main reason why we argued was that he wanted to include overviews from the album's reviews into the lead. He showed me this page to support his statement. I agreed w/ him that it wasn't that bad idea to include some of these overviews. I told him I was going to re-write the lead and have some one then copy edit it. After having re-written it I ask you to please take a look at it (here) and tell me what could be improved. I'm asking you because you're one of the users who are always around the FLC, so if in the future I nominate the article, I'll know that you won't say anything against it, at least not about the lead :).

Could you also tell me which version is more appropiate and non-sujective: number 1 or number 2. Just leave the number when you answer my comment. Thanks in advance. Rockk3r Spit it Out! 05:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of premiers of British Columbia

I was wondering if you can review this featured list candidate. Thanks. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 01:43, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

From now on, I'll just center it myself, and it currently isn't affecting anything on your talk page. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 01:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Done centering and substituting. Happy now? -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 01:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

HAPPY NOW? (GUR!...) -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

All I want you to do now is call me an idiot. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:15, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I can put the signature there, but how do I put the time of the signature on it? -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for fixing both of my FLC template. Maybe you should go to WP:RFA... -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:List of premiers of Canadian provinces

I'll see what I can find. If there's nothing online, I live within walking distance of the Newfoundland and Labrador Legislative Library, so I can go there and ask them. And in answer to your older question, I was planning on going to the City of Toronto archives, which has a couple of photos that we need, but either no online version or a very bad scan of a photocopy online. I'll first see what I can get from them through a polite email. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 11:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reference check

Sure, I'll get to it soon. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 14:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: List of awards and nominations received by Rufus Wainwright

Thank you very much for your time and assistance with the peer review. Much appreciated. I believe I originally nominated the Rufus Wainwright discography and Rufus Wainwright awards articles as Featured Articles, though I have since learned they would probably make better Featured Lists. Therefore, both have been submitted for peer review. I have a question, though. At one point does a peer review session end? Does someone manually remove an article from the PR list, whether or not the article makes FA or FL status? Thanks again for your help! Whataworld06 (talk) 17:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you. I will investigate further, and also see if I can determine how to change a FA nomination into a FL nomination. I find the process a little confusing, but probably just because this is my first time and I am fairly new to wikipedia. Thanks again, and best wishes! Whataworld06 (talk) 17:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
  • You're the best! Is this done now or after the peer review session has completed? Sorry to be a bother. Whataworld06 (talk) 18:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
    • I was planning on leaving the Awards List article open for a couple more days, just to see if anyone else had any suggestions to add. Then, I will close it and submit it as a FL candidate. The Discography article has yet to be reviewed, so I will leave that one up for a while longer. Whataworld06 (talk) 18:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
      • Thanks again, Gary. I may go ahead and close both peer reviews--the List appears ready for FL nomination, and the Discography needs more work (though I am not sure how to further expand it at this time--I will continue working on this and re-submit the article at a later date). Now I can focus on the List nomination and hope it reaches FL status. Whataworld06 (talk) 18:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
• Thank you. We'll see how the FLC process goes. FYI - all references on the Rufus Wainwright discography are now in the cite web format, as suggested. Thanks for the recommendation. I will see how I can expand the List and hopefully nominate it for FL status in the future. Whataworld06 (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

List of men's major championship winning golfers

Hey Gary, thanks for the comments at the FLC, I have addressed all your comments, I would greatly appreciate if you could have another look over the list when you have some spare time. Cheers NapHit (talk) 18:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Advice needed

In view of your obvious expertise with featured lists, I wonder if I could ask your advice concerning a couple of projects I have simmering.

• Mozart symphonies of spurious or doubtful authenticity: I've been sitting on this for a while, tweaking it occasionally. In general, does it look close to FL, or should I take it away for major rethinking?
• Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration: This is a problem, because of its hybrid nature; it has almost enough text to be an article, yet it is basically two lists. I'm still working on it, but does it look as though it would be acceptable as a list if I sent it to FL? Or should I accept that it is really an article, with lists in it?

I'm not asking for anything by way of review at this stage, just a broad, general opinion. I'd be most grateful. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the rapid reply - sorry I forgot the name of my own article! I don't think the Mozartocracy often visits FLC, so who knows what questions might be raised there? I migh well try. As for the Heroic Age, that's my view too. Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Batman & Robin (film)

I delisted your good article at WP:GAR. Anyway, I have already began work on that article, and will probably be back at WP:GAN in a week or less. I just wanted to let you know. Cheers. Wildroot (talk) 00:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:Half-Life 2: Lost Coast

I'll see what sources I can dig up for it, but most of the coverage I know of was in print sources, and as I'm at university, I can't get to my copies. Hopefully what we can find online should be enough. In case you weren't aware, Decay is now GA, and Blue Shift is at GAN. I just need to rewrite Opposing Force and all the HL1 articles will be done. -- Sabre (talk) 00:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Regarding this, I do want to quickly reiterate that I'm not aiming for two separate FT's here. A HL2 FT may be ready first and pass first, but when all the HL1 articles and the Half-Life series article are at GA, I'm still aiming to integrate them as a full series FT, drawing in Portal (video game) (FA) and Codename Gordon (GA) as well. There's no point having two separate FT's on one single topic. I'll try to get on to Lost Coast sometime next week. I've got some other bits I want to get done first. -- Sabre (talk) 00:47, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, although its not a full Half-Life title, it is significantly involved in the series. It was used for Half-Life 2's marketing, and Valve was involved in its development. Its all documented in Codename:_Gordon#Production_and_publication. It covers all the bases for comprehensiveness, and we still have just about the required 25% of the topic as FAs. -- Sabre (talk) 01:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I created this a while back. 13 articles, 3 FA's, only three articles not at a potential GA quality at present. -- Sabre (talk) 01:04, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Metroid

Sure. After all, I'm the major editor of Metroid Prime (the only Metroid FA), and helped that article you're close to turning into the second (Prime 3: Corruption). Even if I should edit less and study more (freshman semester is hard...), I'll try to at least improve the reception (re-include something about the viral marketing, expand on reviews) and trim the plot as you ask. igordebraga ≠ 15:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not much inspired to try reducing, so I removed a few parts only, specially unnecessary adjectives - but it can lose a bit of detail, of course, it has the same number of paragraphs as the Metroid Prime one, but is MUCH longer. Can you help me out on this and the reception? (also,congrats on MP3 passing) igordebraga ≠ 22:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes (I played all Metroids but the Wii and DS ones). That's why I didn't know what to cut. So, I'll do the reception when it's possible (and this reminds me of another Metroid article I tried improving, and I think only the Reception remains... and an image on "Development", but that's a detail) igordebraga ≠ 11:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image reviews

I've got some real life work to do, so don't expect the reviews this weekend. (I should just oppose in order to stymy your FL domination, but I'm too nice a guy :P) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 16:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

FLCon

		The Featured Article List Medal
		For outracing your opponents and co-winning the second ever Featured list contest with the List of mergers and acquisitions by Adobe Systems, List of Tennessee Titans head coaches and List of universities in Nova Scotia. -- Scorpion0422 20:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:StarCraft characters

An overall StarCraft topic would be nice, sort of like Wikipedia:Featured topics/Kingdom Hearts. I'd like an individual one for the characters, but I'd also like to get the locations and species articles included in a featured topic, which I wouldn't be able to do (since I fragged StarCraft universe last year, a "StarCraft universe" topic wouldn't have a central article). I will get List of minor characters in the StarCraft series to GA at some point, just not any time soon. The incoming entourage of new novels and StarCraft II itself will have a significant impact on the minor characters article more than the others, and I'd like to wait for a brief period of plot stability before going ahead with full GA pursuit. Then there's the List of locations in the StarCraft series, which is pretty much the same case. Lots of new planets and characters coming their way. As for the other three, Starleague could probably sit out an FT, I'm unsure if Adventures has the notability to survive, but The Board Game is probably salvagable. I've somewhat downscaled my StarCraft editing in recent months, since I've pretty much been at it since I joined. I will get back to it eventually, but I'm focusing more on "fresh" areas for me at the moment, such as Half-Life, Total War series and Sam & Max. -- Sabre (talk) 22:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

And you're getting medals! I want a medal... :( -- Sabre (talk) 22:15, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Two quick thoughts

Fantastic work on the Metroid articles! I just wanted to let you know two things; one, if you are going to do a Metroid Good or Featured topic, I think you will have to include all 11 metroid games, because there isn't really a lead article for the Metroid Prime series, just the main series article. And also, feel free to take Metroid (series) to FA status, since I have tried many times and have failed, but would love to see it there. So if you feel the urge, it only needs a tiny push and it will be there. All the best! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I really hate to have had to oppose your other topic by the way. If you want to get a featured topic with only those few Metroid articles, you would have to create an article on the Metroid Prime series itself, since there will be objections if you use the Metroid (series) article which covers all 11 games. Also, if you do that, then you will have to include Metroid Prime Pinball and Metroid Prime Hunters for the DS, since they are technically prime games as well. Again, I hate to be the one to say this stuff, but I just wanted you to know. Amazing work, keep it up! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

TOCright

Re: Rock of Ages. Not sure how WP:ACCESS applies. Many dab pages have TOCRight. Could you explain? (John User:Jwy talk) 05:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposals for premier articles

A debate about the list of Nunavut premiers has led to me proposing a minor overhaul of the tables in all of our premier lists. Check it out at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Political_parties_and_politicians_in_Canada#Elections_links_in_premier_lists. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 07:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: References

Partially done. I'll try to finish it soon. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:

Hiya. Well, by looking at it, its GA potential and worthy. Would you like a favor? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I got the time to do it. Can you maybe check out one of the Coldplay songs that I nominated? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, sir, I'll get to it. :) Question: Are the comments at the PR done for the article? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Alright, just wanted to be sure. Don't worry, just have faith, I'll finish the review in time, by today. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:58, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Russell MacLellan photo

Hi there: I received the following letter (which I have a copy of) signed by Russell MacLellan and dated March 18, 2008. "Mr. Bruce Wark: I hereby authorized you to use the two attached photographs of myself, described on the back as RM1 and RM2, for any purposes you see fit, including commercial purposes." Mr. MacLellan who holds the copyright to the photos knew that I intended to use one of them to illustrate his Wikipedia entry. I explained to him, as I always explain to copyright holders that the Wikipedia GNU Free Documentation License would allow him to retain copyright, but grants permission for others to use, copy, and share this image freely, and even potentially use it commercially, as long as they do not try to claim the copyright themselves, or try to prevent others from using or copying it freely. If you like, I can send you a copy of the letter. Bwark (talk) 15:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info about sending the written permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org I do wonder about this though. I've contributed a lot to Wikipedia since September 2007 including two feature articles on Harold Innis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Innis (which was feature article of the day on June 2/08) and Angus L. Macdonald http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Lewis_Macdonald. I generally spend 30-40 hours a week contributing to Wikipedia. For example, I recently got Good Article status for the entry on Ursula Franklin, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_Franklin. The three entries I mention here involved many months of effort. I've also done extensive work on an ongoing project of mine related to Harold Innis, translating his difficult book "Empire and Communications". See, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_and_Communications. So, I guess, as a professional writer/researcher working for free, I know what I'm doing. There isn't a single image on any of these entries that has not been cleared for copyright. So why, out of the blue, are you asking me to jump through additional hoops on the Russell MacLellan entry? I do have the letter of permission I mentioned from former Nova Scotia Premier Russell MacLellan, but I would have to scan it to obtain an electronic copy to send to permissions and since I don't own a scanner, it would cost me a bit to have it digitalized. I'm not sure I care enough to do that. The Wikipedia entry asked for a photo and as a journalist in Nova Scotia, I was interviewing the former premier on another matter and asked him if he would send me a photo and letter authorizing its use under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation Licence. So why, all of a sudden, are you concerned about copyright? The documentation at Image:Russell MacLellan.jpg clearly states that the copyright holder authorized the photo's use under the GNU Free Documentation Licence on March 18, 2008. Under copyright law, I know I am liable for making that statement if it isn't accurate. So where is the problem? Is anyone questioning this licence? I find it frustrating that in spite of all my efforts, I still have to jump through hoops on images that are cleared for Wikipedia use. Makes me want to take up another line of work. If you e-mail me a fax number, I'll send you Russell MacLellan's letter. Then, you can scan it and send it to permissions. Otherwise, delete the photo from the former premier's entry because Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.Bwark (talk) 00:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

PR: List of The O.C. episodes

If possible could you take a look at the prose in List of The O.C. episodes and comment at it's PR. I am requesting this as I was slightly embarrassed how many prose errors you found at The O.C. (season 4) FLC and hope I can fix any prose issues with this list before taking it to FLC. Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:03, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Universities in Canada

Unfortunately, it looks like the votes are sitting at "no consensus" now, so the topic might have to be rearranged. Sorry. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 19:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll concede this one to you rather than getting outside opinion; there are shorter and less useful articles that give their sublists their own articles. How would you feel about moving the list to List of current Canadian first ministers so that we could include the Prime Minister and use the page as the lead for an FT? --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

talkback

Hello, Gary/Archives. You have new messages at roux's talk page.

You can remove this notice at any time by removing this template.

14:59, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Prehistory of Poland

I've implemented the recommended changes in the Prehistory of Poland series of articles

Orczar (talk) 22:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of universities in the Canadian Prairies

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of universities in the Canadian Prairies, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of universities in the Canadian Prairies. Thank you. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of universities in Atlantic Canada

Hi, when you spelled out AUCC in the references, you broke all the links. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC) See this revision. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about this AfD. It is very frustrating when someone hastily throws things up for deletion without understanding the context. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm beginning to realize that I am wasting my time explaining things over and over again. I think that it is time to call in an uninvolved admin (Sephiroth BCR, maybe?). Dabomb87 (talk) 04:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, I don't know if you are still online or not—in which case I am talking to myself on another user's talk page :D—but I think I need some rest. Hopefully when I wake up, everything will be sorted out. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:50, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD

I just closed it. Geoff Plourde (talk) 05:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Echoes

Okay, you helped the article as much as I did, so nominating for the GA and putting a Peer Review at the same time is fair. But why keeping the Reception on just three reviews? I'll do something to expand. igordebraga ≠ 20:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you recognize "adding much info at once" is as important as yours "editing one piece at a time". But I'll still add more info to Reception, reword my additions as you like (Corruption quotes six reviews, it'll be better to reference more people). igordebraga ≠ 21:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

"Crazy" just for doing things so fast, I just have an awful tendency for sarcasm. Sorry. igordebraga ≠ 21:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on it right now, doing research, etc. Did you forget I prefer to submit all at once? igordebraga ≠ 20:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The ref wasn't your fault, but it still being there was. I had put the right ref, but then came the edit conflict, and forgetting something behind while resubmitting is not that hard. But it's already replaced, don't get stressed over it. igordebraga ≠ 01:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Fuchs said "man, you really don't waste time with closing them Peer Reviews, eh?". And I couldn't disagree, the game had barely passed the GA process when you set the FAC up. And is also a reference to your tendency for "turning articles/lists into featured content as quickly as possible" (not a complaint: the huge list on your userpage shows it's effective and creates great articles). igordebraga ≠ 22:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I never meant to offend, specially because your work here is something to admire. Let's just forget this and focus on our editing. igordebraga ≠ 22:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Laurier people

Looking good! (Should be a {{reflist|2}} max, per MOS, BTW...) Let me know when you bring it back to FLC, and I'll change my !vote. Bencherlite^Talk 08:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, hadn't seen that parameter before on {reflist}, so just assumed it was a "|3". Should have known you'd have come across that one before, given the numbers of FLs you have! Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 16:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Dennō Senshi Porygon

Thanks. I've slowly been working on getting it to GA status. I'm just gonna clean it up a bit and fix some references and then I'll nominate it. --TheLeftorium 15:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Half-Life status report

I've just started work on Half-Life: Opposing Force, hopefully I should have it up to GA quality in a few days. Once that's at GAN, I'll start helping you out over at Lost Coast. Once they're both done that leaves just the Half-Life series article, which if we follow a similar method as we did with StarCraft series, shouldn't take long to bring up to GA. Then a full series topic will be ripe for the nominating! -- Sabre (talk) 21:11, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll have to pull out the stops for doing Opposing Force, but I should be able to get it done by Thursday/Friday (I managed to get Decay and Blue Shift up to scratch in two days each, so its possible). I would warn you though, next week I'm going to be hit by essays at university, but Lost Coast is a rather small topic in comparison to normal VG ones, so it shouldn't affect me too much. -- Sabre (talk) 21:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Aye, I really quite like the way the development sections in Decay and Blue Shift have come out. Hopefully I can get the same for Opposing Force. I usually start by searching IGN or GameSpot. They both run dedicated articles on games when they're in development, [39] [40] although in OpFor's case, the GameSpot one is rather lacking. A lot of the time, you can quickly piece together a full development history of announcements, convention appearances, media releases and alpha/beta/gold stages and cancellations if it ends up at that. Odd interviews also occasionally turn up. Worked well for Decay, Blue Shift, Sam & Max: Freelance Police, and Empire: Total War. I usually check GamePro, 1UP and CVG afterwards for additional information, as their article coverage isn't generally as good as it is in IGN or GameSpot. As I get the PC Gamer mag, I generally check that too, not all their articles turn up on CVG. The other thing is to try going out of your way to find interviews through Google and the like (typing the game name and "interview" often works). Fansites, particularly for cancelled games, can often help as well, on one I found several scans of print sources' previews for Freelance Police, which provided a bounty of information. If you've got Lexis Nexis access, you might try that; I've only got JSTOR, and that's a load of rubbish from the VG perspective. If all else fails, just ask at the project, some people may have print sources. The only way I got anywhere with Sam & Max Hit the Road was to ask there, as the game predates the dot.com boom. -- Sabre (talk) 21:36, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not quite done with Opposing Force yet. I still have to do the reception section (I hate writing reception sections. I much prefer development sections.) and the introduction, as well as finish off the referencing, although that should just be a by-product of writing the reception section at this stage. I should be ready for Lost Coast tomorrow or later today. Feel free to start without me. -- Sabre (talk) 13:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty much done with OpFor. Probably could use a copyedit from someone who knows how to copyedit, otherwise I'll shove it up for GAN when one of the two articles I currently have up is reviewed. I'm turning out sources for Lost Coast as I type, I'll post what I find here in a few minutes. -- Sabre (talk) 15:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I just had a whole bunch of sources on a list, but then Internet Explorer decided to crash, so I lost the entire 1/2 hour of work. I had that Eurogamer source, but I had another bunch as well that aren't used. -- Sabre (talk) 16:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I've added a bunch of the sources I could find post-crash to the todo page. -- Sabre (talk)

Ok, I've started building up the development section, I've expanded on some (but not all yet) of the technical stuff. I'll deal with that bit, (you said you hate development sections) if you can build up the release/reception section (I hate doing those bits). Should be done in no time. -- Sabre (talk) 17:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll try finishing off the rest of the development section tomorrow. -- Sabre (talk) 18:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you think we could get away with one more image? I got hold of the original split screen comparison video displaying both fixed aperture and HDR rendering in effect at the same time. I think that it would be quite useful for readers to be able to see the difference. We've got the room to shove it in now. -- Sabre (talk) 15:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. Development section is looking good, gameplay and plot sections referenced-ish (I couldn't be bothered to go through the game files for dialogue), lead is ready, if you think the release section is reasonable then we're ready. -- Sabre (talk) 16:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm about to become buried in work, so that's going to reduce the amount of work I can put into the series article for a brief time, but I should be able to put most of it together with few problems. I've already got most of it planned out. Hopefully, it should all be done by the end of the year, longer than I might have hoped. As such, I've no problem with the HL2 topic going up now with supplementary nominations changing it later, although you might have noted Judgesurreal777's comment on my userpage about Survivor. I hope that doesn't cause any problems, otherwise we're going to need to find someone who can speak Japanese (or merge it into the HL series article). -- Sabre (talk) 21:51, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

You sure we need another FA? I'm not objecting to a Lost Coast FAC, but I made it out that we should have 3.25 articles as FA for a full topic and I would have thought they'd have been willing to settle for a rounded down 3 FA's instead of taking issue over the lack of .25 of a classification. -- Sabre (talk) 21:54, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

There's nothing I can do to expand it. I can't find any additional sources in English. It was just a heads up, I'm hoping that it won't matter. Go ahead with the topic, there's nothing else to do at present but try for it and see what happens. -- Sabre (talk) 22:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Slipknot discography

I've had a hard time deciding what to rule on that one since the oppose votes are skewing the meaning of the criterion in question, but I think I'll close it as no consensus with a note. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 21:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Over the Edge (1999)/archive2

Hey Gary, as an exchange of reviewing many of your FLC's, can you review my article at the above PR?--TRU_CO 01:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I changed the link. It's archive 2, I changed it in the header.--TRU_CO 01:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much, I appreciate your time and comments.--TRU_CO 02:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Half Life 2: Lost Coast

Half Life 2: Lost Coast has been promoted to good article status.

//roux   11:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice work

As you may have noticed, I've been immensely busy lately with my attention diverted away from Wikipedia, so just a little message to say well done for getting Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Bloc Party/archive1 over the hill. Best regards, WilliamH (talk) 12:00, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

RE List of Wilfrid Laurier University people

I just had an massive edit conflict with you, and I forgot to comment out that comment when merging those edits together. Sorry about that, and don't do anything because I am working on it right now. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, I commented out the column, however there are a few dead links that I forgot to fix when merging our edits together. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, they seem to have disappeared. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Metroid Prime 2: Echoes

I will once I take care of my own FAC, I kinda wanted people to respond all together below my comments, not inline so I couldn't tell what's supposed to be done or not... oh well. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 21:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

re:Talk:Pokémon Diamond and Pearl/GA1

No problem. As for the "official" source you requested, do you mean one from Nintendo, or just a reliable source. In any case, I haven't seen one, but then again, I haven't really been looking for one; but I can look. Artichoker[talk] 22:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll try to find a source for that; although it will still be a long time before Good Topic is reached, because I need to get Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen and Pokémon (video game series) to GA, both of which need major work. Artichoker[talk] 23:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, that one slipped my mind for a second. Well I have lots of work to do, and if you ever have time, I'd love to have your help. Cheers, Artichoker[talk] 23:37, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

That's a little bit of a tricky question. There was a long discussion about it here and here. When the discussion died out it was pretty split so we opted for No Consensus and allowed the article to stay separate. However when the game is released in the US I will be majorly expanding the article, and if it turns out that there isn't enough info to warrant a separate page, it will probably be merged. Artichoker[talk] 23:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:HL series

Well, I had a similar structure to the SC series article in mind.

• Introduction
• Story
• Games
  • GoldSrc games - HL1 games and expansions
  • Source games - HL2 games and episodes
  • Spin-off titles - Codename Gordon, Lost Coast, Portal and the like
• Development
• Adaptations - the only real are of adaptations in this case is the merchandising
• Reception and legacy - Paying particular attention to the genre-definingness of HL1 and HL2, and the benchmark-expansion-pack-status enjoyed by Opposing Force
• Cultural impact - this series has spawned a ton of customisation, mods, other games and the like, that should be covered

I won't be able to work on it for a while (two, maybe three weeks before I can properly get stuck in), research on the Norman conquest of southern Italy takes priority, unfortunately. Once I'm free of that, I'll be able to engage back at full strength. -- Sabre (talk) 00:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

If there's nothing in the way of adaptations, I suggest that merchandise be covered in cultural impact. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 00:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

@Gary: Will do. Hopefully, it should all be minor stuff from here. Going to unleash the copyediting posse on the article again? I felt so inadequate after they'd finished with the Ghost article :S @ David, aye, that's probably a good idea. I'll go for that instead. -- Sabre (talk) 00:16, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I suppose we could always remove it and replace it with "They added shiney stuff! Ooooh! Ahhh!" Or is that a bit too general? I'm hoping the wikilinks will counter any technicality problems, because I think we'd struggle to describe it in any other way, other than as that or "four attempts were made at creating HDR" without elaboration. -- Sabre (talk) 00:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Metroid Prime 2: Echoes

Don't worry about accessibility when it causes a lack of comprehensive coverage; after all, we've got scholarly journals and books that can't always be easily verified. I stress this especially since the reviews that I read stressed to a negative extent the lack of new features; it's a component missing from the article at present. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the difference... Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, I'd still like to see the print sources integrated. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 03:09, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Looking for Simpsons production info for a few articles

Sure, I can probably do Two Dozen and One Greyhounds this weekend. :) TheLeftorium 18:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I would love to, but I'm going to be rather busy for the next little bit, so I likely won't have a chance. I'm sure Left would be more than willing to listen to them for you. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:13, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven't listened to the commentary for that episode in a long time so I'm not 100% sure, but it probably wont be enough for FA. --TheLeftorium 18:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd say the best part would be Bart with his lizards. Just so you know, Bart the Mother is a season 10 episode, so we're not working on those yet. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

And about The Day the Violence Died‎, Nancy Cartwright has a chapter about directing Kirk Douglas in her book, so I'll take a look at that at some point and see what I can do. No guarantees on when I'll be able listen to the DVD commentary though (actually, I recently lent the disk that episode is on to a friend. I'm hoping to get it back this weekend). -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I can do Bart the Mother, but I'd rather do a season 7 episode. Season 10 is a pretty horrible season IMO. --TheLeftorium 20:09, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

True, but I actually remember the commentary for that episode being pretty good (thanks to David Cohen). I suggest asking User:Ctjf83, he's been the one doing most of the season 10 eps. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I may as well do it then. I can probably have it done by Saturday, is that OK? --TheLeftorium 20:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

It seems Ctjf83 will be able to do it. I'll do "Greyhounds" then. :) TheLeftorium 20:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I have various projects that I've been focusing on, the Simpson family FT, a Nobel laureates FT, and a few other random lists and articles that I've been pecking away at (Actually, just yesterday I added a "Current goals and projects" list to my userpage, see that for more details). At the same time it's exam season, but I thankfully have a pretty good schedule (and all my essays are done). -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

While we're on the subject, would you mind taking a look at List of current Canadian senators? I'm pretty much done it but I'm just waiting a bit in hopes that some of the Canadian Politics WikiProject members will take a look. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot FTC back and forth and back and forth and back and forth

I fear this is no longer a productive discussion. I think it may be a good idea to take a break please, and revisit at a later point in time. Please understand that I do value your contributions on this project and respect your work - I just think that this thread of back and forth and back and forth and back and forth is not going anywhere or constructive at this point in time. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 20:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Gary. You have new messages at Ctjf83's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Head Coaches List Input

I recently expanded the List of New Orleans Saints head coaches, and seeing how you have experience with lists of these types, I was wondering whether I could have your input/comments on its talk page?--TRU_CO 00:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Quick question - Adminship

Hi, I've been looking through your contribs, and your FL/FA work - just wondering, why aren't you an admin yet? I checked your previous RFA, and it would've been successful bar a few minor mistakes. Would you consider re-running?--Flewis^(talk) 06:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

List of premiers of Canadian provinces

I've been thinking that the list of current premiers won't be historical enough to act as the FT lead for all of the historical provincial lists. I think we may have to start working on Premier, which will be trickier than most lists and pop culture articles. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 18:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Alright, sorry for moving it. My concern is that people's questions about their individual topics in talk:candidates and talk:criteria tend to swamp-out the discussions that are actually about the nomination process and the criteria. I just realized that the questions pages isn't linked on the topics tool box on the right side of the screen. Once I add it there the page might get more attention. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I was talking about the right-side of the screen in the non-talk space. There was once a time when tonnes of random conversations were going on at once; the page has quieted down a lot since then, we'll see whether this is the new lower average or just a temporary lull. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I doubt many people mind how many pages are on their watchlist if it works out to the same number of discussions. But in any case, criteria discussions should be in the criteria section, and some of those have been misfiled. I guess the time when WT:FTC was more active was when the procedures were more in flux. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's time to get rid of it right away. I'll add it to the navigation bar so people know that it's there and see whether it would be more efficient to merge them after a few weeks. If we do end up merging them, we'll at least have to make it clearer which questions go where. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:34, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

The Day the Violence Died

You're in luck. I'm in a good mood, I have my DVDs back and I have some free time. A production section will arrive within an hour. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Done. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Google News, and Newsbank are your friend. Also check through EW.com and IGN.com, they sometimes have comments. For ratings info you'll have to go through Newsbank (although you can occasionally find such stuff on EW) but the episode name is never mentioned, you'll have to search for "The Simpsons", then find articles published a few days after the episode aired. As for some comments, the BBC website is usually good for one or two words, and you could try some old DVD reviews of the seventh season. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:21, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I have access to Proquest through school, but it's pretty useless (mainly Canadian articles). Come to the Simpsons channel. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:43, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Two Dozen and One Greyhounds

I've finished the Production section for "Two Dozen and One Greyhounds". :) TheLeftorium 22:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem! By the way, I took this screenshot that may be useful in the article. --TheLeftorium 23:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Plot

Not to my knowledge, but you'd have to ask around-I generally source my plots when I can because I like to pad my reflists :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:57, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

GANs?

Why have you put Slipknot Demo and Welcome to our neighborhood up for GA again when the issues that were first raised are still at fault? REZTER ^TALK ø 11:27, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Ira Needles

On 30 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ira Needles, 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 14:30, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

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

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

Transclusion in TV episode lists

There is a debate going on between me and [[User:Bignole|Bignole about whether episode lists should use transclusion or not. I think they should transclude and I notice you requested transclusion in the List of The Office (US TV series) episodes FLC. However Bignole is insisting they don't transclude for accessability reasons. Would you mind adding your thoughts at the List of The O.C. episodes FLC where it is currently being debated. Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:30, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: List of premiers of Canadian provinces

I'll put something together in the next few days. This is the busiest time of year for me, but I should find an evening free to put it together. Right now I'm thinking of having a short section for each province giving a three-sentence overview of its political history along with some interesting facts (longest-serving, etc.) and a link to the province's main article. Even though it's listed by province it might still be a good idea to include the current premiers list. I'll see how the thing turns out. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 21:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

What are you thinking of calling it? --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 03:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Cool, that's the one I was leaning toward too. I'll move it right now for you. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 03:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I put them in the official order of precedent. It might not the best order since only rules-sticklers are aware of it, but I like it. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 03:48, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:The Day the Violence Died

Aw, you removed my quote box... Some more reviews might not hurt (have you tried finding DVD reviews of the season seven boxset?), but otherwise it looks pretty good. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:56, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice work on the article! :) You should probably add links to TV.com, IMDb, and TheSimpsons.com though. Like this. --TheLeftorium 14:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. Also, maybe you could add an image of Bill Oakley to the production section? --TheLeftorium 17:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I found some reviews that may be useful in the article:
http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=60554
http://www.dvdmg.com/simpsonsseasonseven.shtml
http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/simpsonsseason7.php
http://www.dunkirkma.net/inreview/features/simpsons_seven.html
--TheLeftorium 19:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I searched for "The Day the Violence Died" and "review" on Google. The first three are probably reliable. Not sure about the fourth one. --TheLeftorium 19:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Probably just The Simpsons: A Complete Guide to Our Favorite Family. I just looked in it and it mentions this quote:

“ Animation is built on plagiarism! If it weren't for someone plagiarizing The Honeymooners, we wouldn't have The Flintstones. If someone hadn't ripped off Sergeant Bilko, there'd be no Top Cat. Huckleberry Hound, Chief Wiggum, Yogi Bear? Hah! Andy Griffith, Edward G. Robinson, Art Carney. ”

So I guess you could add to the article that Roger Myers Jr. mentions those TV shows, characters, and actors. --TheLeftorium 19:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Primate at FAC

Hello! As a previous reviewer of Primate at FAC it would be great if you could have another look at the article. The FAC has been restarted, and any comments would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Jack (talk) 17:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Lisa the Vegetarian

Thanks! Yeah, I was really surprised that there was so much information on the DVD commentary. --TheLeftorium 18:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:

I can try. :) Well, wrestling is the only thing I got up at GAN. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Good articles

Hi Gary, I've created the list of Good articles by readable prose size. You can find it at User:Dr pda/Good article statistics. Dr pda (talk) 01:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, my name is William, nice to meet you. I saw you left a few comments at WrestleMania XXIV's FAC review. If you have time do you think you can leave a few at Lockdown (2008)'s FAC review? No matter how small or big they may be, I will be grateful if you have enough time.--WillC 02:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

You definitely deserve one more barnstar

		The Way Too Many Barnstars Barnstar
		For your five new featured lists and because you already have a ton of barnstars, I hereby award you this Way Too Many Barnstars Barnstar. Keep 'em coming. —ŁittleÄlien¹8² 03:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Bart the Mother

Sorry, I've been slacking and a little busy lately. I'll either get the production tonight or early late tomorrow! :) CTJF83Talk 20:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok I got the production information, cleaned up the plot and lead, and added to the reception section! LOL, I'm going to have to take partial credit for this GA! CTJF83Talk 08:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

LOL, ugh you're a pain! ;) I'll watch it again on Thursday. CTJF83Talk 19:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok...oh, and no, I don't have access to any books. CTJF83Talk 19:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Signpost interview?

Hello, I will be working on an article for an upcoming issue of the signpost that will interview several prolific FL nominators. it is based on one recently done for FAs. Would you be willing to be interviewed for this? You can see the questions I have set up here. If you are interested, please let me know. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Laptop

No, that's totally cool. I was going to fail it anyway for huge gaps in history and design information. Steven Walling (talk) 20:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: GA Review

Thanks for the heads-up! I wasn't sure if it was still possible to do it the old way and was pressed with time when I wrote up the review. Should I go ahead and apply the template now? —Erik (talk • contrib) 20:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I did this. I think part of my confusion was that I went to WP:GAN and did not see the template put forth to use. I then began my review, then found the template in a deeper link. Can you look at my edits and make sure I took care of everything? —Erik (talk • contrib) 20:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Question

Stupid question: Would a dash be required for ---> Harvard-Westlake School? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I see. But, I'm sorta asking for Maggie Gyllenhaal's article; would a dash be required if the school is unlinked? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Alright, just needed to know. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Sub FLC Template

My bad. For some reason, when I integrated it regularly there was a glitch with it so I substituted it, I guess that was wrong to do, but thanks for letting me know Mr. King :)--SRX 22:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

BBC News review

Thank you for your review of BBC News and for your suggestions. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 00:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/30 Rock (season 2)

Thank you for reviewing any 30 Rock related GANs. Now, there is something else you can do, but it only really requires one word. ;) Corn.u.co.pia / Disc.us.sion 04:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:References at FLC

Both (of course), why? Cannibaloki 01:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I know... Cannibaloki 01:32, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

AFL-NFL merger

I don't think it should have an en dash. All the sources I have seen use hyphens. Have you discussed the move on the talk page? Dabomb87 (talk) 21:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Jaguars

Hey, I left some comments. Also, sorry if I didn't respond any sooner, been busy. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Left a couple more comments at the Vikings list PR. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, now that the discussion with that somebody else is done and my real life work is completed, I should be able to do your peer reviews. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

You seem to be doing the playoff winning percentage columns wrong. Looking at List of Miami Dolphins head coaches, how can George Wilson have a playoff winning percentage of .278 if he never coached a playoff game with the Dolphins? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the head coach list for the entire NFL, try doing it for the current coaches first (see List of current National Basketball Association head coaches). Dabomb87 (talk) 01:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Kirby media

I think I've addressed your concerns about the lead in the article. Thanks a bunch for reviewing! -- Nomader ^(Talk) 00:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

And another quote...

"I must rule with eye and claw — as the hawk among lesser birds" — Dune. Your monthly reminder to jump in the hellfire. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 11:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC) Just go already dammit so I can stop leaving these messages!

"I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain." The litany against fear from Dune to help you get over your intolerable stubborness ;-) — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 11:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

=/ And I've only had a co-nom on one RfA (Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ynhockey 2) recently, although I've been searching for prospective candidates. Meh, you do realize that 1) you can stop the relentless hounding from every user that knows you to go to RfA 2) you're going to pass dammit 3) you would benefit from the tools, right? — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 03:26, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

re:FAC

Ah, cool. Lets do it indeed. Sorry I wasn't around much for the peer review, what with uni essays and the sudden overwhelming urge to finally clean up Sam & Max. -- Sabre (talk) 21:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Portal and Half-Life

Quick question: have you ever thought about using the commentary tracks for the development sections? Ep 1's and Ep 2's are rather extensive, Portal, I'm not sure about. Sceptre ^(talk) 23:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Peer review limits

As you know, users are asked not to list more than one peer review request per day, and not to have more than four open requests at a time. You have recently listed 3 or 4 requests in a day and the last I checked you had TEN open requests. I will not list them on the backlog, since you told me you found your own reviewers. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I was the (lucky?) beneficiary of a lot of those PR requests :P Dabomb87 (talk) 04:08, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, you (literally) asked for it! :) Gary King (talk) 04:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I know, as I said, lucky beneficiary! :D Dabomb87 (talk) 04:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Tut tut, Gary, you should know better :P You can be fast and sloppy, or you can do it right... (like me :P) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 04:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Therion (band)/GA1

As the nominator did not fix the problems during the review, I could have done? Cannibaloki 18:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Cannibaloki 18:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Jamie Oliver info

News: First in the kitchen is What's Cooking? With Jamie Oliver. Like Cooking Guide, it's an interactive cook book stuffed with 100 recipes from the celebrity chef. You'll be able to use your DS as your shopping list as you select the ingredients you need on the handheld. Jamie will then take you through your recipe, step-by-step. You can use the ingredients to create your own dishes before sharing them with friends via Wi-Fi. There are some Cooking Mama-style recpie challenges too, which have players using the stylus to chop, stir and serve. You can challenge fiends to a cook-off or try and beat the clock.

Interview:

• ONM: There are quite a few cooking games coming out this year. What makes yours so special.
• JO: I've tried to make my games as three dimensional as possible. You've got the shopping lists so you can take it shopping with you, you can write your own shopping lists, add all your other stuff like bog rolls and drinks and beer—so it's actually a notebook too. You can also use Wi-Fi to send recipes to your mates who've got the game as well. The game's got 100 recipes, with 25 games of recipes, and if you're cooking, it's got voice recognition so you can turn the pages hands-free.

• I've tried to push the game as much as possible interactivity-wise and I've tried to make it relevant. It's a game and you can pass time with it. If you get good at it undoubtedly it will have a positive effect on your real life cooking. But with the shopping lists and sharing of recipes, you can actually shop more efficiently too. So all of this is a great excuse to push your cooking and get better.

• ONM: We know you're a busy boy but what's your favourite game of recent years?
• JO: I've played loads of videogames, but I've always been such a freak with my time and working. When I was a kid, I saved up and I had a ZX Spectrum, a Commodore 64 and then an Atari with all the retro cartridges and stuff like that. More recently, I got addicted to Tetris. Bizarrely, I always compare Tetris to working in the kitchen when the cheques come in. In a way, it has very similar addictive motivations: it's about being methodical, about timing, and that's also true for cooking.

Issue:34/October Pages: 8-9

Review: Score: 70% After teaching Rotherham how to cook in Ministry of Food, Jamie Oliver has brought his culinary crusade into the homes of DS gamers with What's Cooking?. It's a good idea as the only thing lacking from Nintendo's Cooking Guide was a big face to promote it.

Of course, amateur cooks are far more likely to trust Jamie's recipes than Nintendo's and What's Cooking is packed with 100 great dishes from his books. Like Cooking Guide, it's got a shopping list feature so you can take your DS to the supermarket and each recipe is easy to follow although it lacks the videos that made Nintendo's game so great for beginners.

It all goes wrong when you enter the Test Kitchen. The stylis-controlled cooking tutorials and games aren't very user-friendly and the recipe sharing isn't as good as it could be as you can only use ingredients and methods from recipes you have unlocked through playing the game. It's a shame as you feel the cooking games were designed only to appeal to gamers, and, let's be honest, they won't be the ones buying this game.

+Great recipes +Easy to follow +Nice shopping list feature -Fussy cooking games -Frustrating recipe sharing

Summary: Some great recipes but the experience is marred by some fiddly cooking games.

Issue: 37/Christmas Author: ONM team Page: 87 Enjoy. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 22:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Musician Awards

Hey there Gary, I noticed you were the creator of Template:Infobox Musician Awards and was wondering, would you consider adding a few more awards to the table? (Reply here on your talk page. Thanks.) DiverseMentality 08:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure, let me know what you want. Gary King (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Let's see, we have the ASCAP Awards (seven different award shows, not sure if it should all be combined as one though), MTV Africa Music Awards, NAACP Image Awards and Vibe Awards. If I think of more afterward, I'll drop by your talk page. DiverseMentality 22:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

ASCAP and Vibe awards don't have dedicated pages for the award ceremonies themselves; I'm trying to only include "major" awards shows, and that usually means those that have their own articles. So, I'll add MTV Africa and NAACP. I'm guessing these won't be used, though, immediately? Are you just looking for awards shows to add just in case? Gary King (talk) 22:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, I see. As for MTV Africa and NAACP, they will. I'm currently working on a to-be featured list candidate that has both award shows, and another one already is a featured list that uses the custom award field for NAACP. Oh! Here's another: MTV Movie Awards. DiverseMentality 22:57, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Hm, I'm trying to add only music-related awards. Award ceremonies that are general art, I usually add, too. But this one is completely film. Not sure if I should add it? Anyways, probably better to continue this conversation on the template's talk page; makes more sense there. Gary King (talk) 22:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox Musician Awards#Template:Infobox Musician Awards. DiverseMentality 23:06, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Need help on copyedit and prose.

Considering your vast experience may I request your help on one of the Featured list candidate - List of states and union territories of India by population. I have been asked to take expert's help on the prose of this list along with copy-editing. I have tried my hand at it but it seems more is needed. Your expertise can help me getting the list to FL. Thanks a lot in advance. --GPPande 11:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your guidance Gary. I would make similar improvement in prose in rest of the article. --GPPande 07:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Castlevania

Eh, don't really care because I don't have a Wii. Only Castlevania games I get are the portable console ones (Order of Ecclesia was pretty good). — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 22:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

GAN BIS Vietnam

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by your third point 'include at least publisher and access date' --Sauronjim (talk) 16:29, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Two Dozen and One Greyhounds

Yeah. I've checked "The Simpsons: A Complete Guide to our Favorite Family" too but there's nothing in there. --TheLeftorium 18:45, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Done! --TheLeftorium 20:52, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Half-Life (series)

No, I don't have a sandboxed version of it, I've been tied up with Sam & Max articles recently when I've had free time from uni work. We could start work on it, but be advised that I've got two GAN's going on and a third in prep for nomination. Still, that shouldn't take too much focus away. Do you want to work in sandbox or shall we create new stub sections in the existing article and develop from there? I have a structure planned:

• Introduction
• Story
• Games
  • GoldSrc games
  • Source games
  • Spin-off titles - Codename Gordon, Lost Coast, Portal and the like
• Development
• Cultural impact and reception - Paying particular attention to the genre-definingness of HL1 and HL2, and the benchmark-expansion-pack-status enjoyed by Opposing Force, and noting the ton of customisation, mods, other games and the like the series has as a legacy.

-- Sabre (talk) 11:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the SC series article, but also the Sam & Max article, which I recently redid. I rather prefer the way the prose in the Sam & Max article covers the series, hopefully we can apply that to this one. -- Sabre (talk) 21:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll start working over the next few days. I'd suggest we try filling up the development section in a similar style to how we did in the SC article, we can refine it later. -- Sabre (talk) 21:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK nomination of List of Cleveland Browns head coaches

Hello! Your submission of List of Cleveland Browns head coaches at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 17:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for List of Cleveland Browns head coaches

On 14 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of Cleveland Browns head coaches, 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) 10:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for What's Cooking? with Jamie Oliver

On 15 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article What's Cooking? with Jamie Oliver, 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) 16:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:

I could, only if you do me a favor, and no it doesn't have to do with the wrestling articles I got up at GAN. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you think you can review Guitar Hero World Tour? Cause, I was supposed to review the article, but I withdrew my name from reviewing the article. Also, I don't want to seem like a hypocrite leaving one article and reviewing another, so... --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Alright, cool. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The Simpsons Game

		The Simpsons (Annoyed Grunt)-star
		For your excellent (and very quick) work on The Simpsons Game as well as various episode articles. Now if only I could get you interested in joining the Simpsons project... -- Scorpion0422 21:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

It hasn't passed yet, so I'm violating WP:CRYSTAL, but oh well. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks Gary King (talk) 21:33, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

If you plan on doing Hit & Run, this might be of use. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

That's why I said "might". It does say what helped the designer win the rights to work on the game, which could be added. Every little bit helps. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't suppose this could be considered a RS? It mentions that the working title (and name it was first announced under) of the Simpsons Game was "The Simpsons XXII" -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

It says "A playable prototype also helped Radical win the rights to the Simpsons game." -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:56, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, either way it's how they got the contract in the first place, so it would be useful as background info. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll start working tomorrow. :) TheLeftorium 22:14, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Stephens City, Virginia GAN Review

Hello, just one question about the review. The main history section was written by one person, (reference #12 [41]) hence the lack of references to most of the history section. It is all one person. The books and articles that he references to are the other references in the section. Would that have any difference, or would that still cause the article to fail? Just curious and trying to line up what needs to be worked on.

Also, on a good article, are pictures a good or bad thing? I have seen some good articles with very few and some view many. Thanks...NeutralHomer • Talk • December 3, 2008 @ 04:58

I will get right on the reference thing (am really looking to get this article up to Good status). As for the images, I took all of them (I live in Stephens City), so I have released them all under CC 3.0. Thanks again...NeutralHomer • Talk • December 3, 2008 @ 17:53

This is a timestamp just to ensure that this thread gets archived. Gary King (talk) 01:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: reversal

Please! :D I tried doing it; didn't work out too well. Ironholds (talk) 18:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Appears to be fine; thank you so darn much. Feel free to add a FL star to your little galaxy :P. Ironholds (talk) 20:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Well it isn't really worth much coming from me (I'm not a particularly highly respected member of the community) but:

		The Original Barnstar
		for flip reversing those lists without even a hint of Garage and for your plethora of Featured contributions. Ironholds (talk) 21:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Gary. You have new messages at Rst20xx's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FYI

Fuchs will be mad at me for this, but see this, lest your FT get nuked ;-) — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 16:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: What games do you like?

Yeah, I've played some Zelda games. Aren't most of those at GA or FA status already, though? I like the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter games. Not sure if you like any of those though. :P I have the DS version of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and the PS2 version of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, if you'd like to work on any of those (plus I searched for the Harry Potter game at Yahoo! Games and there's lots of development info). TheLeftorium 15:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

re:HL series

At present, no. Best I've got is this, we may be able to splice some development information on technological and distribution advances that originated with the series off of that, but I've not come across any articles that cover the series as a whole. Things like top 100 games listings should come in handy though, they usually include both HL1 and HL2 these days due to the individual merits of both games.

As far as the development section at present goes, I think it could be a good idea to work in the ports of Half-Life to Dreamcast and PS2, as we don't give them much time in the games section. Most of the information for them is in the Blue Shift and Decay articles, although the dates tend to be earlier as the ports were announced before the accompanying expansions. I'll try to hit the reception section over the next few days, after I finish referencing the games section. -- Sabre (talk) 11:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Half-Life: Opposing Force just passed GAN. All HL1 articles check out, just the series article now. -- Sabre (talk) 19:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Gary. You have new messages at Rst20xx's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your move request

Check out Template:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. The standard disambiguation used for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles related articles is "(TMNT)", not "(Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles)". TJ Spyke 02:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

just a note

before Sandy yells at you, you really shouldn't have more than one FAC going (with or without conoms) at one time, especially when there are so many on the docket presently. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 23:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I will try to review a couple of those FACs this weekend. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

(RE:Scene7 copy-edit) OK, first pass (lead and 2/3 down in company) done. Two inline comments to address. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:42, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, done with those. I think where the company does business and its competitors in the geographical location where it does business is related, though. Gary King (talk) 22:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

List of commercial failures in video gaming

You are one of the best wikipedians I know so I thought that you can help me with the List of commercial failures in video gaming. Can you like look at it and do something like change a few things or add a few games or consoles to this list or maybe even give me your opinion? I want to make it a Featured Article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II

Can this be used as a reference for the plot section? --TheLeftorium 12:58, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Two Dozen and One Greyhounds GA review

Reviewed this one. Really, it is of GA quality, but I decided to review in more detail for the sake of improvement. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:35, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:FTC Question

Since I was very bored, I calculated who should nominate with you and Milk's Favorite Cookiefor the topic, List of NFL head coaches by team. With my calculations, Buc, Nishkid64, Jwalte04, and I have contributed to more than a total of 2 articles relating to the topic. So I'm guessing, are you going to include us all (yes, I'm very star-hungry), or are you going to only include Milk's Favorite Cookie and yourself? Milk's Favorite Cookie is currently on a wikibreak, but he truly deserves to have the nomination. I know I'm making a big fuss out of this, but it's just to clear things up. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 21:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

What is the lead article going to be? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I was originally going to use List of National Football League head coaches and gutting it to list the history of each team's head coaches, but I don't want to be the one who removes the giant table with all the statistics. I'm thinking of either creating History of National Football League head coaches (or something along those lines), or bringing List of current National Football League head coaches to FL, and I'm leaning towards the latter. I'll probably need further input on which article to use as the lead, though. Gary King (talk) 22:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The VG Barnstar
		For improving so many video game articles, and for giving me advice on how to improve my writing. :) TheLeftorium 21:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiCup notice

The 2009 WikiCup will begin on January 1, 2009. The first round will run through March 31, 2009. For more information on this tournament, read the "about" section on the main WikiCup page.

This year, we have a different system in calculating points. At User:Garden/WikiCup/Submissions, you will find information about submitting your article (and other) work to earn points. Each contestant will have their own individual subpage for submitting completed work to us.

This year, User:ST47 will also be running one of his bots to calculate mainspace edits and read your submission subpages to calculate the point values you receive based on our scoring chart.

Questions or comment? Ask at the talk page or go directly to Garden or IMatthew's talk page. Good luck and Happy Holidays! -- ayematthew ✡ and Garden. 13:50, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For his undying will and efforts to constantly improve the quality of articles on Wikipedia ... Gary King definitely deserves much more. --KnowledgeHegemony talk 17:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

X-Men films good topic nomination

Wolverine has been peer reviewed. Would you like to Support this nomination? Thanks. Wildroot (talk) 18:11, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, I like the way your user page is very organized. I will probably do the same for my user page. Wildroot (talk) 00:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Final Fantasy (video game)

I continued editing this article after FFX was kept at FAR. I think I've taken care of the outstanding issues and it seems everything controversial is sourced. However, I haven't looked over Gameplay and Plot sections yet, but from the looks of it, they seem to be pretty decent. Would you mind taking one more look over it before sending it to GAN? If you're too busy right now, I understand. The Prince (talk) 22:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the copy-edit. I'll take a look over the aforementioned sections soon. Actually, there are actually quite a lot of FF articles in need of help (e.g. the FAs FFIV and FFVI), but since FFII is at GAR, I guess that'll have to be our next project. The Prince (talk) 23:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Great work so far. Some may say the plot section is too big; what do you think? I think it's a good idea to simply re-assess FFII as B-class, and work on it from there in the same style as FFI. It's a lot easier for me to work on an article without having to think about not making it in time, like with the FFX FAR. The Prince (talk) 00:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

You're talking about the plot for FFI, right? The Prince (talk) 00:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

GAN query

Hiya, on your comments about the Radioactive waste article, what exactly was the problem with the sources in the Radioactive waste#Management of waste section? I'm not seeing what needs to be fixed. --Elonka 00:44, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, but wasn't this a rather rapid fail? Why not make some suggestions, and then give the nominator a chance to address the concerns? --Elonka 01:01, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

My apologies if it seems I'm coming down on you too hard over the GA review. I've been trying to mentor Mervyn Emrys (talk · contribs), a PhD who had been having a really hard time on Wikipedia, as no matter where he goes, he seems to have the unfortunate superpower of running into editors who immediate bite! He has found this enormously discouraging, so I've been trying to help guide him through the wiki-rapids. Recently I've been making an attempt to steer him towards WP:GAN, because I think it could be an excellent niche for him, to participate with article review (as you and I both know, the backlog there is considerable!). He took heed of my advice immediately, and nominated an article as soon as I told him about the page. However, as luck would have it, when he nominated his first ever article for GA, he got the immediate brush-off within 24 hours (sigh). I was particularly surprised to see the "insufficient references" complaint, considering that the article has over a hundred cites!

If you have time, what I'd really appreciate is if you could assist with the mentoring. I see that normally your GA reviews are not quite as cursory. Perhaps you could take the time to do a "full" review of this one article? I get the feeling that with just a little bit of encouragement, Mervyn could be a real asset to the project, and I'd like to see what we could do to make the best use of his talents. Thanks, and I hope that helps explain why I'm paying so much attention on this one, --Elonka 01:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

A thousand thank yous.  :) --Elonka 02:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Max Payne 2 image

I hate to be picky, but I'm fairly sure that this image is from the early areas of Max Payne 1, not Max Payne 2. I don't recall any subway missions in the second game, and the models look very much like the original low poly ones. Compare with [42] [43] [44] -- Sabre (talk) 22:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, I copy-edited the lead and the first two sections; the writing is quite good. I also left one inline comment. I have to go somewhere now, and will return to this later. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:38, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

AAAAH! Damn, I go too fast sometimes :(. Anyway, I finished copy-editing. I must say that the prose in the Development section is superb. Since I'm in the mood, I will work on Scene7 more, which I totally forgot about for a couple of days. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:22, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I am a bit hesitant to be the primary reviewer on Max Payne 2 because of conflict of interest and all that. I may post a couple comments later. I will definitely post comments on Scene7's FAC after sifting through the prose. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Done with Scene7. Left an inline comment. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:50, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Replied on my talk re those two Simpsons articles you wanted me to look at. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

		Merry Christmas!
		DiverseMentality is wishing you a Merry Christmas! Hope you have a great Christmas day and a happy holiday season. Stay safe! DiverseMentality 08:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas from me too. Here's hoping for a safe and happy holiday season! Dabomb87 (talk) 17:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Bart the Mother

I have added all of the production information available from the DVD. It probably needs needs copyediting as usual. ;) Merry Christmas! —TheLeftorium 11:51, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

BTW, here is some reception:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3940355.stm - Nancy Cartwright's favorite episodes
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/review/the-simpsons-the-complete-tenth-season - review
http://www.dvdtown.com/reviews/simpsons-the-the-complete-10th-season/5056 - review
http://www.bullz-eye.com/television_reviews/1998/the_simpsons_10.htm - review

Scorpion0422 has Nancy Cartwright's book so there might be something useful there too. —TheLeftorium 12:44, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there is anything on the episode, but I'll take a look in a bit. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Final Fantasy II

Go for it, I'm not too clear on how to. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:52, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou for transcluding Paulini Curuenavuli discography

Hello Gary King, thankyou for transcluding it to WP:FLC. I was in a rush finishing it before midnight last night, so I must've forgot. Thanks, lets hope it passes nomination. Cheers! Hpfan9374 (talk) 23:26, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Genghis Khan edition conquest of the wiki world triple crown

I, Cirt (talk), am pleased to award the coveted Genghis Khan edition conquest of the wiki world triple crown to Gary King (no actual crown is necessary when you're this good...just show up in white robes and ordinary editors will quiver in your presence). This special award recognizes the rare editor who contributes 40 pieces of featured content, 40 good articles, and 40 "Did you know?" entries. All hail Gary King! Cirt (talk) 23:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Your most honored conquering majesty, please accept the Genghis Khan award with my gratitude, for outstanding editing work on this project. An outstanding achievement, and you are the first editor to be recognized with this award. Great work - especially on Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses) - I see you were able to overcome a few issues during the FAC, nice job. The community thanks you. Cirt (talk) 23:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Good luck! Cirt (talk) 23:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Applied economics

Sorry about the citation things. Also I think we were overlapping with our editing.. I'll stop now. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 01:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC))

This article is a summary of some of the major points from Backhouse and Biddle with a few extra things put in. I think it should have some more input from a range of editors first - and I intend to look for some other sources. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 01:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC))

Re: List of Mario series enemies

Thanks, forgot about this. I've fixed most of the redirects now, but I really need to get to bed. If you could fix any of the rest then it'd be helpful. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 06:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look into that when I'm next doing such things. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:11, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! You're doing a good job with things too! Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 00:39, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Typographical quotes

One thing that is quite discouraging is that the Wikipedia recommendations change a lot. When I started fixing quotes, the recommendation was that the article was made consistent, and that is what I set to do, fixing mixed articles to use typographical quotes, and leaving alone those who were all in typewriter quotes.

Speaking of that, it is quite annoying to see ugly, typewriter quotes everywhere. But I cease and desist, it won’t be the first time I give up on Wikipedia or some aspect of it. Too philistine, as you can see when I tried to fix the mess on relational vs SQL databases a few years ago. Leandro GFC Dutra (talk) 15:19, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Cleveland Browns

Hi. I don't know how much detail it has about the Browns during the team's three years of inactivity, but I would start with Terry Pluto's False Start. I'm not familiar with the book you mentioned on my talk page, but Arcadia's offerings generally tend to be glorified picture books, so I wouldn't rely on it too heavily. Hope that helps a little! - Eureka Lott 02:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

New Super Mario Bros. GA

Hey Gary, just thought you'd like to know that I am reviewing this GAN. I'll tell you when I am done. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:27, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

That's exactly the reason that I like to review your GANs, I can be as detailed as possible and not worry about a backlash. Anyway, better get back to the article. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:32, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

High-level radioactive waste managment

Hi Gary. Where are we at with this article? I think i've addressed your comments and the references have been cleaned up. Anything else I need to do? Mervyn Emrys (talk) 01:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II

Is the article ready to be GA nominated or is there something else that needs to be fixed? —TheLeftorium 22:40, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Damn, I hate copyediting (mostly because I suck at it). I'm afraid I'll have to leave that to you. —TheLeftorium 22:56, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow, very nice work on copyediting the article. I feel bad for taking some of the credit for the article now. :P —TheLeftorium 19:18, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Dude you keep writing "ce" as an edit summary. What does this mean? Also are you an admin? Please if I'm also going to contribute to the article I'd like to know what I'm in for. Thanks LOTRrules (talk · contribs · email) 22:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

It means copyedit. And no, he is not an admin. —TheLeftorium 22:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Why doesn't anyone nominate you as an admin? Your record is very humblesome. Anyway, thought I'd let you know that the aXXo article is in trouble. Should we mention what type of software he uses? I've taken it up on the talkpage. Only one user has so far responded. LOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 01:18, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Well there is a how-to guide on the internet. Specifically it's on demonoid.com and any other viable torrent site. No websites have been found although I've tested the guide and it seems to work. LOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 01:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I suppose you're right. Torrents do get deleted after a while. Best to wait until it comes on the news. LOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 01:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gary. Some IP has added a section in the article titled "future games". It as no citations and I think it may well breach copyright. But I'm not sure. LOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 13:45, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

The Simpsons Wrestling

Hey Gary, I found some development information for The Simpsons Wrestling and added it to the article. Do you think it's enough to make it a GA? —TheLeftorium 16:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, good. If I need help with the reception section I'll ask you. ;) TheLeftorium 16:18, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Alanis Morissette awards and nominations

Hello!

I stumbled across your page and noticed that you made a lot of contributions to the lists of awards and nominations received by various artists. I have currently been working on the List of awards and nominations received by Alanis Morissette, and I am basically finished, except for citing the sources, since I do not know how to do this. I was wondering if you would be willing to help cite the sources of her awards and achievements, because I would love this article to receive a feautured status here on Wikipedia. Your help is appreciated, and I hope you have a wonderful new year! WereWolf (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, alright. Thank you. Your help is greatly appreciated. :) WereWolf (talk) 19:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiCup

Delivered by neuro^(talk) for Garden and ayematthew at 20:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)