User talk:12george1/Archive 4

Hurricane Dean (1989)
Hi, I have reviewed Hurricane Dean (1989) and placed it on hold for up to seven days with some small concerns. You can see my review here: Talk:Hurricane Dean (1989)/GA1. Canadian  Paul  17:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

1990 AHS GAN
Talk:1990 Atlantic hurricane season/GA1 - I reviewed your GAN. Good luck with it, and let me know if you have any questions. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 17:29, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Tropical cyclone forecast model GAN
I tried to address your concerns in the nomination page. Do you mind having another look? Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 21:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I thank Tito for helping out. I went from one active GAN to three within 24 hours! Thegreatdr (talk) 00:25, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Port of Miami Tunnel GAN
WP:Citing sources is no help, at all, to my cluelessness on the different types of references, such as the multireferencing "^a b c" stuff, and the type, such as citenews. There should be an easier way, and I know this is exactly what drives people away from doing things properly. I wasn't totally clueless about it, it was just never necessary before because there aren' always split uses of one source.

Proper citing is difficult, I wish someone who's good at it would do it. Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Nevermind, I got it and I don't want help, it's not that tedious on a real computer, at least for the news sources (cite news), but what do I use for the "Dredging Today" ref and the one reference to the official site? Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:34, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I really, really need a list of the different types of citation types, i.e. cite news is the only one I know of. What about a bizjournal reference? Or a Miami-Dade.gov reference? I know they are not "cite news" Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * But couldn't cite news work for all of them anyway? Used cite web for the other ones. That's all I can do today. I did the news ones. Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC) Daniel Christensen (talk) 03:41, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I have pretty much done everything requested in your initial set of issues. I am going to add more inline citations from the references. Like I said in the GAN subpage, I'm not just gonna drop this page and forget about it if it gets a GA, getting a GA was never my intention in the first place. I just wanted to write a good, thourough, well written article on a major local development. I actually enjoy procuring this article. What were your other issues with it so I can keep working on it beyond the updates I do regularly? Daniel Christensen (talk) 03:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Reference 6?
It's not a bare url;. ^ Chrissy Mancini Nichols (March 21, 2011). "PPP Profiles:Port of Miami Tunnel". Metropolitan Planning Council. Retrieved 2011-03-31


 * It wasn't 6 it was 10 and I fixed it. Daniel Christensen (talk) 19:28, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 March newsletter
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is with 231 points, who leads Pool H.  (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see WikiCup/Scoring.

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Good but not forgotten
As I promised, I have continued devloping the Port of Miami Tunnel article, and now it's significantly more solid than it was before, with much of the additions being more references versus more than content. I know it's short (32 Kb), but how far short do you think it really is from meeting FAC? It covers about every possible concept of the project thus far. The rest is just construction. It has almost no recent coverage except for minor "controversies." Daniel Christensen (talk) 21:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive


On behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, we would like to take the time and thank you for your contributions made as part of the March 2011 Good articles backlog elimination drive. Awards and barnstars will go out shortly for those who have reviewed a certain number of articles.

During the backlog drive, in the month of March 2011,
 * 522 GA nominations were undertaken.
 * 423 GA nominations passed.
 * 72 GA nominations failed.
 * 27 GA nominations were on hold.

We started the GA backlog elimination drive with 378 GA nominations remaining, with 291 that were not reviewed at all. By 2:00, April 1, 2011, the backlog was at 171 GA nominations, with 100 that were left unreviewed.

At the start of the drive, the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 101 days (Andrei Kirilenko (politician), at 20 November 2010, reviewed and passed 1 March 2011); at the end of the drive the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 39 days (Gery Chico, at 24 February 2011, still yet to be reviewed as of this posting).

While we did not achieve the objective of getting the backlog of outstanding GA nominations down to below 50, we reduced the GA backlog by over half. The GA reviews also seemed to be of a higher quality and have consistently led, to say the least, to marginal improvements to those articles (although there were significant improvements to many, even on the some of the nominations that were failed).

If you would like to comment on the drive itself and maybe even make suggestions on how to improve the next one, please make a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/March 2011. Another GA backlog elimination drive is being planned for later this year, tentatively for September or October 2011. Also, if you have any comments or remarks on how to improve the Good article process in general, WikiProject Good articles can always use some feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles.

Again, on behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, thank you for making the March 2011 GA backlog elimination drive a success.

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 21:54, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Chesterfield GA Review
Would you mind wrapping it up please?  Rcsprinter  Gimme a message  20:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Adams River (British Columbia) GAN
Hey George, thanks for the notes. Will begin making changes. (I have a week, right? This is my first GA) Cheers,  The Interior  (Talk) 21:01, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Done making my changes, can you review? Cheers George,  The Interior  (Talk) 19:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

March 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive award
And apologies for accidentally posting it your actual user page. My fault. –MuZemike 17:30, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Hurricane Hiki
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Justin Bieber, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - (CK)Lakeshade  -  talk2me  - 20:42, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to and  who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 19:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)