User:EyeSerene/Archive5

Question on GA process
Hello, I have caught your name in the Good article nominations/Mentors list so please allow me to raise a question. I am member of the WikiProject Chess that has its own formal process for review at this page. There are some articles, like Alexander Alekhine, that we have assessed as not of sufficient quality for FA-class or A-class, but good enough for GA-class. Thus, would it be possible somehow to immediately set this article as GA-class, without going through the whole GA-nomination process ? After all, it has already been reviewed quite extensively, as you can see in this review, so I do not see the point of doing another review again. What do you think ? SyG (talk) 20:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your great explanations on my Talk page! SyG (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Atlantic campaign
Thankyou very much for you message, I was wondering whether I was being unreasonable and I was glad to see that you didn't consider what happened to be entirely my fault. I must admit to feeling a little bruised after that, and it'll be while before I go back to FAC (partly as I am now involved with GA Sweeps). Nonetheless I will return at some point and when I do, twill be in triumph I am sure. Thankyou very much for all the help you gave me towards this series of articles, I couldn't have achieved as much as I did without the support of yourself and User:Carre. Many regards,--Jackyd101 (talk) 21:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Review of a GA Review
Hi, thanks for the offer of checking out my review. I'd be interested on any comments you might have. The review is at Talk:Unforgiven (2004). There was also some discussion at my Talk Page. Thanks again! Nicholas Perkins (T•C) 11:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Joking Apart GA sweep
Thank you for your sweep GA review of Joking Apart. I especially appreciate your minor fixes: it's annoying, really, when reviewers point out a very minor issue that would have been quicker to fix themselves rather than type it out!

I'm aiming to improve the article to FA status in due course, so any other issues you picked up on that you think would help get it there would be appreciated. Cheers, The JPS talk to me  13:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your additional comments. I've expanded some parts, and rearranged others. I'm going to get round to rewriting the 'Episodes' section. More reliable sources should start to drip through with reviews of series two. Bathurst is making various TV and radio appearances on Tuesday too (The Wright Stuff, LBC, The One Show). I've requested a copyedit from LOCE. After that it should be ready for FAC. Thanks again for your work. The JPS talk to me  18:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The President is on hold
Hi, happy to do the review. I've left a detailed review on the talk page but basically the article needs more work on its prose before I'm comfortable passing it, otherwise there aren't really any serious issues. I'd recommend asking Carre to take a look too, he's good at picking up things other people have missed.--Jackyd101 (talk) 13:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

A new Talk Venue?!
I will look into what happened with that refernce, I believe at one time it was complete... i have no idea how it degenerated... All the comments are a little bit overwhelming, I guess we maybe thought we would just get a GA stamp but we are trying to stay positive and work through all the comments!!! Thanks for all your time and help, I dont know where this page would be without you!--Mfreud (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I tried finding the source via google scholar and the university library webpage but couldn't quite locate it. I then went through the page's history and it turns out that it was added by Eecono so I have left a note on her talk page and so hopefully she can address where she got this source from, or I will ask her about it next time I see her. Thanks again for all your help, fingers crossed we get to GA in the next few days!--Mfreud (talk) 19:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the congratulatory note but I have to say we would have never of made it without all your input! So, Congrats to you too, we did it!! Now onto Andewits comments and suggestions! The next couple weeks might be a bit slower as we have run out of english sources in the libraries so we are now going to start searching through the spanish ones which is a bit more arderous! Thanks again for all the help thus far and I hope you added the little decal saying you contributed to making the President (novel) a good article!!! :)--Mfreud (talk) 23:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Nebulous GA sweep
Thanks for giving the article a quick copyedit - I hadn't looked over the article for a while, so quite a bit of non-GA standard stuff had crept in. Thanks for cleaning that up. I've implemented the suggestions you made on the talk page. I'm a bit worried the lead is still a bit short - it's never been my strong point, but I've lengthened and clarified it a bit. Laïka 14:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

re-GA reviews
Hi, don't worry, it's a good thing to make sure these articles are kept to a sufficiently high standard. I think part of the problem is that a lot of them have had uncited stuff creep in during the time since they passed - quite a few of them were promoted in 2006, and articles like Mr Bean, due to the programme's target audience, seem to be quite attractive for children to edit! I've been adding quite a few references to that, so hopefully that will be sufficient by the reassessment date - the only problem I'm finding is that the article itself is probably the most detailed thing about it on the internet! But, no, it's good to have problems pointed out - the only reason I had to let Dad's Army slip was because I don't have access to any books about it at the moment, and it needed loads of work doing on it. I'll perhaps have to have a go at that when I have a free moment. Thanks for letting me know about One Foot in the Grave. Bob talk 13:28, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review idea
Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Peer review/backlog.

There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).

If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

copy editing
As it states on my user page, I do copy edits for those who ask. :) And you did. So nicely. :) Sometimes I don't have time or am overwhelmed by daily copy editing (grading!), so I haven't made myself available for that particular job very visibly, but I don't mind volunteering on a case-by-case basis. Working on The President (novel) is a pleasure. Awadewit | talk  22:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The General in His Labyrinth
Eyeserene, you have been so magnificent and helpful and generous with your time regarding the WP:MMM. Thank you so much! I feel I shouldn't even think of imposing you any more. But I just thought I'd make you aware that the editors of The General in His Labyrinth are feeling a little overwhelmed. They've made some great progress, and the article is now one of our better ones. But I suspect that a fresh eye and a bit of encouragement would go down very well, if it were at all possible for you to provide them. But please don't feel pressured at all! Thanks again. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * (Copied from talk page:) Yes, many thanks for this. Seeing the list of the pages you've watchlisted, I note that they're among the project's most successful so far...  I can't believe that's just coincidence!  I agree that The General in His Labyrinth is pretty close to a GA.  Its editors will be encouraged to hear you say that.  And I'd say that I, the Supreme isn't all that far behind.  Many thanks again!  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 10:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * (Copied from talk page:) More thanks! I'm glad that you are also finding the process worthwhile.  It has been (and still is) interesting indeed.  Incidentally, you might be interested in this, which is the beginnings of a reflection upon this experience.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 11:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * (Copied from talk page:) Glad you're interested. And heh, I'm equally interested to see what my conclusions will be!  It's a story so far without an ending...  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 12:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * (Copied from talk page:) Heh, indeed. Though strangely, and in a rather febrile rush, I feel I've come to the end for now.  (Though cf. the suitably wiki-like caveat in my final sentence!)  Anyhow, I would be delighted to hear your, or anyone else's, responses.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 14:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding layout, we must have our wires crossed. I agree with you! It was changed to the way you suggested. Historical context first. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 18:20, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ES; I'll take that nice glass of wine to my herbal bath now :-) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

On behalf of The General and His Labyrinth editors, I just wanted to say thanks so much for all your help on our article! It is currently on hold for GA and we are still working hard to get it past that stage and onto FA. Thanks again! Eshiu (talk) 00:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you believe in these (and I'm not sure I do either)
But here goes, inspired by this diff (but it could have been so many others)...

Thank You
Haha I'm glad you like my picture. If you'd like I can draw one of you for your main-page... Lincolnchan98 (talk) 09:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Two things
Sorry to hear you've been unwell, but isn't manflu a chance to get off work and edit Wikipedia :-)

Anyway, the two things are... First, you offered to write an article for the next GA newsletter on delisting. I can help if you want to write it, otherwise DC or myself will cobble something together. Second, any chance you could GA review Miguel Angel Asturias? It's been at GAN for a while now, and the first reviewer went AWOL. By the way, I have appreciated so many of your contributions that I have lost count. Geometry guy 20:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back!
Man-flu can be truly debilitating. I'm glad you survived! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 17:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: your ga newsletter contribution
Thanks for writing that. I'll take a look at it in the next few hours and edit as needed. At first glance, most of it looks ok, and I don't really have major problems,... ;-)

I think we also need to put a few April Fools jokes into the newsletter. If you have any ideas, please add them to the draft version. ;-) Dr. Cash (talk) 18:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Surnames
(Copied over from my talk page:) Heh, no problem. It would be like calling you Mr. Serene, rather than Mr. EyeSerene. Or something like that... --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 09:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

RFA?
 bibliomaniac15 would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact bibliomaniac15 to accept or decline the nomination. A page for your nomination at Requests for adminship/ . If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

I think that you would make a good administrator. If you accept, I will fill in the redlink. Please respond as soon as possible on my talk page, accessible by clicking the 15 in my signature.  bibliomaniac 1 5  Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 22:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * All right, I've created the page. Once you are done answering the questions, please transclude your RFA onto the main RFA page. If you'd like me to change my statement, please contact me. Thanks, and good luck!  bibliomaniac 1 5  Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 02:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know the procedures very well, but I would like to do more than support: could I add a conomination? Geometry guy 22:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Dictator novel
Hi, EyeSerene; I wasn't sure whether you wanted my impressions here or on the article talk page, so I chose the former.

I agree with your review comments and share the concern that, even with complete rationales, the book covers would likely not qualify for fair use in this article. The images appear to be used as “eye candy”; I’m unable to discern or anticipate meaningful contributions beyond this malapropos function. I’m forced to wonder how seeing, for example, the cover of The President helps me to understand either that it was a classic novel in this genre or the genre itself. Fulfilling either of those purposes would be necessary to satisfy WP:NFCC#8. Other (perhaps now moot) considerations include the apparent ability of prose alone to convey meaning (which would be more so pertinent if this were up for FA) and the questionable necessity of all three covers; NFCC#3A requires as little use as possible in each article.

Hope this helps. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 15:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for all your help on our page. Wondering if you could update on what still needs work. Would love to see what you think!--Abarratt (talk) 23:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Re-Review of an older article
Long time no talk EyeSerene! I seem to recall that you did an informal peer-review of an article I have done significant work on and had recently submitted for GA Nomination, the Battle of Verrieres Ridge, some time in June 2007 (I can't remember the exact date). Shortly after that review was given, it failed its GA Nomination. However, I have taken the last nine months to completely rework a majority of the article. Since you were the one who previously reviewed it before GA, would it be possible for you to have a quick "re-look" at the page within the next few days (if you've got time). I appreciate any help you can give me. Thanks! Cam (Chat) 23:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. Whenever you've got time is fine by me:) Cam (Chat) 02:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure! That would be great!!  Would you mind still leaving some comments after your review of it? Thanks. Cam (Chat) 00:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok. Sounds like a plan.  Cheers! Cam (Chat) 22:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

April GA Newsletter
The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash (talk) 03:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Dictator novel GA work
For the two articles I've been working on, Domingo Faustino Sarmiento and Latin American Boom, I've done a "what else is needed for GA" section since there was a lot of material and it seemed easier on the students to condense it down to a short list when they'd made a lot of progress. I wonder if that would be useful on Dictator novel? It does look like they've dealt with most of them; I was glancing down the list just now and it's quite confusing with the multiple conversations embedded. Just an idea. Mike Christie (talk) 10:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, now I really am confused. Isn't it Facundo that Awadewit reviewed?  Per WP:GAN you're the reiviewer for Dictator novel, or am I missing something? Mike Christie (talk) 12:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a fantastic job you're doing there. I'll be happy to take credit for it if you continue to deny it's your work. :) 86.44.26.69 (talk) 02:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Note on RfA
Dear EyeSerene, just so you are reassured, I am somewhat considering altering my stance in your RfA based on your thorough response to my initial weak oppose and I will not just draw a line in the sand and decide to continue to argue against you throughout due to any unconstructive remarks made by others. It seriously bothers me that some approach RfAs in that manner and I will do my best to keep in mind that you are not responsible for what others might say. Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 07:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * (reply here per you talk page preferences): Thank you for your comments. It's true that we've often found ourselves on opposite sides on AfD, but while I stand by both my delete and keep !votes and recognise that the former outnumber the latter, I also have great respect for your principled stance on rescuing and improving articles. Any editor that goes to some of the lengths you have to salvage an article clearly has the best interests of our encyclopedia at heart, and that makes you one of the good guys, regardless of differences in the interpretation of policy. I have no problem at all with your RfA comments - based on your experience of me, you simply raised some issues you feel are important and should be considered, and in the Wikipedia spirit of collegiate debate, everyone should respect that. I realise you're awaiting my answer to your question - I'm trying to work my way down the list when I get the odd moment, but it's entirely possible I won't reach the end before the RfA closes! You deserve an answer though, so just in case I don't get there, I'd say (as a gut reaction) that an obvious injustice has been done to those articles, and they should be restored and relisted to gather a valid consensus. I will try to provide a fuller answer on the RfA page if I get the chance. All the best, EyeSerene talk 14:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the nice reply; I will change my stance to at least neutral for now. Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 15:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Silly comment
I've never mistaken myself for an Aussie (or a Kiwi). Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 20:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow!
Thanks for the congratulatory note. I honestly don't know what to say. There were times, including this very morning where I was rather unsure if we would make it but here we are and I have been telling all of my family and friends about it shamelessly. After so many hours, days, weeks and months... it feels great to have a sense of accomplishment. Sometimes copyedit notes felt as if they would never end... but they made such a huge difference in getting the article to where it is today. Especially in the beginning you were such a fabulous and positive source of motivation to keep going and building up the article. Thanks for the encouragement along the way... I guess I am not so speechless after all! :P :D--Mfreud (talk) 07:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: On Hold.
Thanks for your assessment. I've already gotten to work in fixing most of the "well written" issues. It will take me several days to address the "Images" issues, although a majority of the issue stems from me not entirely knowing the copyright status. The two maps from the Jarymowycz are actually not from a book itself, but from a PDF web file, so I'm not entirely sure what the copyright status on those two is. I shall, however, investigate that quickly. Thanks for the assessment. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 23:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * (P.S. it's a bit of a pain that we're communicating across an 8-timezone shift. Makes for very "back & forth" assessment.  Oh well) Cheers! Cam (Chat) 06:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for the the copyedit as part of the assessment process. I read over the final changes, compared it to the previous version and thought "my God, was that really my writing?"  It was so disjointed before.  I appreciate your assistance. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 03:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hola once more. would it be possible for you to redo the "Spring Counterattacks" Map for me?  I'll have time to redo the "verrieres geography" and the "Spring forces" one, but not the counterattacks one. Thanks.  Cheers! Cam (Chat) 05:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, one more thing, the weeks started off busier than originally anticipated. I've done some experimental reformatting of the map on my laptop, but most of it was in the iffy-dismal range.  I'll wait until you've finished the counterattacks (simply to see what we define as "good") to post the spring formations & geography ones.  In the meantime, I'll continue to experiment with them to see what I can come up with. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 02:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That'll work just fine. I'll give Operation Spring another go today & tomorrow.  What program did you use for that one? as I'd like for them to be somewhat similar.  Cheers! Cam (Chat) 23:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. No hurry on the map.  Whenever you're able to get it done is fine for me ;) Cheers! Cam (Chat) 22:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries about the map, I've had stuff like that happen too (Provincial Debate Case + Power Surge + didn't bother to save = bad situation). Sure, I'm thinking we should pass it now, and then you can upload the map whenever you're finished (since that's really the only thing that we haven't fixed since the start of the review).  Cheers! Cam (Chat) 20:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry!
Sorry, I think I just undid a bunch of your edits on Facundo. I'm not sure the precise etiquette, and I'm sure I broke it, but I figured that there were more of my edits than there were of yours... Can I help you re-do them? --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 14:36, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

FAT
Thank you for the warm welcome. You're right it is a bit intimidating but the welcome messages were very encouraging. I hope to make up with enthusiasm for my lack of experience :) Acer (talk) 16:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now an administrator
I'm happy to inform you that, due to your successful request for adminship, you have now been promoted to an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or stop by the administrators' noticeboard. Congrats! Andre (talk) 01:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Congratulations! I'm not surprised at all with the trust the community has in you. I hope you will continue to better the encyclopedia with your new mop. Just remember not to dive in too quickly.  bibliomaniac 1 5  Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats on your new tools... Balloonman (talk) 02:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * We're happy for you! Congratulations! Majoreditor (talk) 02:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Have fun with the tools, but please keep editing content! Wikipedia needs editors like you. Oh, and congratulations.  Mike Christie (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. seresin ( ¡? ) 02:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)\
 * Congratulations on your adminship! Cheers! Cam (Chat) 05:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow, congratulations. That was a seriously impressive Rfa. Keep up the good work = )...--Cameron (t|p|c) 16:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations!!! keep us measly editors in mind :)  D u s t i talk to me 17:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Gratz! -- Avi (talk) 17:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * All the best! --Bhadani (talk) 17:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations EyeSerene. :) SunCreator (talk) 17:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats, and welcome. :) Orderinchaos 17:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Your welcome. Hope to see you round wikipedia soon :-) TheProf - T / C 17:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats. Make sure you visit new admin school and this essay on staying calm. Bearian (talk) 18:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome, and I'm glad to hear of your success. Best of luck, and keep up the excellent work! Happy editing! :-)  Lra drama 18:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats, and welcome onboard to admin team. OhanaUnitedTalk page 18:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats! I know you will do a great job with the admin tools. Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 18:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: My talk Page
Thanks for the chuckle. First laugh of the day!! :) Cheers!  D u s t i talk to me 17:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

About your RfA
Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari 20:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats, and welcome aboard! I'm sure you will do an excellent job as an admin. Please do give me a poke if you need advice, help, or whatever. Best, Keilana | Parlez ici 22:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Congratulations. Now you are a pariah too :-) Here is a userbox template that I found useful:
 * Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 22:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 22:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi EyeSerene, I'm really happy that you passed! I really want to apologize for the stupid comment I made at the start of the RFA.  It's basically because of me that Bibliomaniac had to put that massive warning across the RFA not to answer questions for the candidate.  Luckily it all worked out in the end, but I really am sorry to have caused the distraction for no good reason.  I've been so blown away with the success of WP:MMM, and know you've done a lot of good work there.  Something like WP:MMM is what makes me proud to be a Wikipedian.  Good work! --JayHenry (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! I hope you will do a great job as an admin. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 05:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome! Acalamari 16:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Your RfA
You're welcome! And congratulations. // A Raider Like Indiana 11:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Reliability of Outpost Gallifrey forums
Hello, again. A few weeks back you gave the GA Sweep for Joking Apart (which is now up for FAC, incidentally). One of the comments you made was concerning a reference to the writer in a post in the Outpost Gallifrey forums. I'm currently having a discussion on a show written by the same writer. I wonder if you would mind looking at it and casting your third party opinion? The JPS talk to me  11:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your second opinion. One editor is citing WP:IAR. Oh well. I'll let them get away with it for now, but if I get it to a GAC then it would probably have to come out. The JPS talk to me  19:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Nabulsi soap
Nabulsi soap has been nominated for GA status. Just thought you should know. The nominator is the main contributor Tiamut. I gave her the suggestions you gave me. Regards, --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hello EyeSerene! Just wanted to say many thanks for your support on The General in His Labyrinth (specially early on when we didnt know how to cite on Wikipedia). It is greatly appreciated! ALl the best Carlaty (talk) 05:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Double thanks and to what Carlaty said! You really helped us out a lot! Eshiu (talk) 19:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hooked on Doctor Who
Ever since you gave me the picture of the TARDIS (which I, in my ivory tower was woefully ignorant of), I've started watching Doctor Who. It's fabulous! I love it! Thank you! Awadewit (talk) 19:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I've been a Star Trek fan for many years, so it's nice to add another sci-fi show to the list. I'm a Data fan myself. :) Awadewit (talk) 03:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

GAN review - would like your opinion before posting
I read and reviewed "A Day in the Life", and would like your opinion before I put it on hold. You can read the hold notes here. I don't know how to make the fancy template with the 15 px hold, pass, fail icons. So that would be nice to learn. Thanks for your time. --Moni3 (talk) 22:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Some questions on a GA review
Hi, EyeSerene. My first GA review went well - passed and deservedly so. My next two will probably be failed due to absent nominators.

My 4th, however, I'm having some difficulty with. The article is Katie Sierra. I see neutrality problems in it but I hope to be able to find better sources for the author who claims he has exhausted all avenues. My connection to my library isn't working right now. That's not why I'm contacting you, however. I don't believe the article establishes that what Ms. Sierra went through was abusive or excessive. However, I don't know if it's the responsibility of the article to do so. It could be read right now either as ambiguous due to poor writing or research, or neutral. I'm not really looking for it to lean one way or the other, just provide examples of what Ms. Sierra endured at school.

Another issue I have is the use of epigraph templates, which give the same appearance as blockquotes for single-line quotes, which I maintain give undue weight to some statements. I'm going by the MOS in asking the nominator to integrate the quotes into the paragraphs, though he seems to disagree. I've also posted a question on the GAN talk page about naming conventions, and I'll probably suggest the article be moved to a title that better reflects the controversy instead of a biography.

I would appreciate your input on any of these issues. Thank you. --Moni3 (talk) 14:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)