User talk:4u1e/archive5

Peer review for Jack Warner
Hi 4u1e, I saw your name on the list of volunteers for peer review. I just nominated a piece on movie mogul Jack Warner. The article includes a good deal of information, and it's reasonably engaging, but I know it can be improved. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 15:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the copy editing! If you feel there are any general weakenesses in the article, please don't hesitate to let me know. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 18:08, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks 4ule, I just returned to my computer, and I haven't had a chance to give your comments the close reading they deserve. At a glance, they struck me as reasonable and constructive.  I'll respond in detail ASAP. Thanks, again, for your time and consideration! Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 04:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Not at all! You're comments were just what was needed. By the way, another reviewer just recommended that I tone down references to Warner's personal life in the lead and slightly reorganize the sections on his professional life. If you have time, I'd appreciate any comments on these relatively minor changes. Either way, thanks, once again, for your thoughtful and thorough critique. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 20:18, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Alan Kulwicki
I wrote: "Kulwicki was buried in his family plot at Saint Adalbert Cemetery in Milwaukee, consistent with other Polish Americans in the cemetery." Would you help me with wording this sentence? What I was trying to accomplish is saying where he was buried, and to add that he is buried in a family plot. These family plots were done by people with Polish ancestry. Twelsht has commented that more Polish American things probably should be added to the article, and this is a great place to add a comment to reinforce that thought.

I went to the cemetery to take the picture of his gravestone, and I found out that his family's stone has listed around 10 family members including his mother and brother. This portion of the cemetery is a Polish American portion, and has several family plots like his families. Any thoughts about how to reword this so its less confusing? Royal broil 00:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request - Lancia LC2
I was wondering if it might be possible for you to give a quick peer review of my Lancia LC2 article as I'm considering nominating it for GA. Mostly just looking for another pair of eyes to see anything I may have stupidly missed or anything that you think might make for a better read. I know it isn't the usual F1 stuff, but not all that different. Thanks in advance. The359 (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

hey!
Well, I have only delivered the Newsletter to a few as a trial run, and I didn't have time to get a bot to do it. Well, I have two that are interested in helping in this project. These are Chubbinator and Diniz. Thank you for subscribing, could you sign your name on the sign list here -> WikiProject Formula One/Newsletter

Thanks for your interest! LB22   (talk to me!)  Email me! 18:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Issue 2
Welcome to Issue 2!

Copyright material - Arth.R2
Hello, 4u1e

Just to get things right this time, can I rewrite GrandPrix.com material in order to use it? Do you know any other good Internet references? I am really interested in improving the race reviews.

Thank you.

Arth.R2 (talk) 14:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Your rewrite of Saruman
Damn good job is all I have to say. Dr. e X  treme  18:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Edit conflict
No worries - you got most of them. DH85868993 (talk) 01:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Jack Warner FAC
Hi 4u1e, This message is to inform you that I recently nominated Jack Warner as a featured article candidate. Your comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, again, for your extremely detailed review of the article! Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 09:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

McLaren brakes
Hmmm. Could just be. My recollection was that they had been used for only one GP, but even that wouldn't preclude their having been spotted in testing at the end of the previous year. First Google result gives the BBC report, which gets the issues spectacularly wrong anyway - it was left/right not front/back, and the accusation was four wheel steering, not four wheel drive. Have to look for some cite of the journalist story, I suppose. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 18:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * This says it was at the 'Ring the previous year, so I guess 1997 it is. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 18:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Next NW (Early)
This is early for reasons LB22 and I understand.

Max Mosley
Hi hope your well.

I nominated it for FA, fingers crossed! Shame there is no picture of the man himself. I had a go at the final section on the 2007 season could you take a look? Cheers!

Tommy turrell (talk) 23:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, good idea have added a comment to the discussion page. Tommy turrell (talk) 12:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. Mark83 (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Requesting peer review of Facebook
I noticed that you listed yourself as a volunteer for "Applied sciences and technology" subjects for peer review. I am requesting a peer review from you for Peer review/Facebook/archive2, if you have the time. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 18:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Facebook is currently nominated for a WP:GA at Good article nominations, so if you have time, please review it. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 20:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Oil shale and Oil shale extraction
Hi, 4u1e. I am going to nominate the Oil shale and Oil shale extraction articles for FAC. As the last peer reviews of these articles were not very productive, I wonder if you agree to take a look and give some advice and hard critics before proceeding with the FAC nomination? Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 19:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, 4u1e. Thank you very much for reviewing the Oil shale article. It achieved FA status and your review was a great help in this process. I would like to ask also reviewing the Oil shale extraction article. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 19:13, 30 April 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; 23:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for agreeing to help. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I made some suggestions at the Saruman peer review - hope they are helpful (one less person to guilt this way ;-) ) Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 22:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Jack Warner FAC
Hi 4u1e, Thanks, once again, for your detailed feedback and support! Your comments certainly helped me to improve the article, and I wanted to let you know that it was just promoted to FA status. With appreciation, -- twelsht (talk) 04:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley
Happy to do it! I'm turning in at the moment. But I'll be on it tomorrow. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk)

I admire your dedication to the sport! By the way, I printed up a copy of the article last night and read it this afternoon. It a great piece! Most of the things I caught were minor style issues, e.g., inconsistent rendering of numbers and inconsistent comma usage. One thing: Despite the fact that Mosley eschewed a career in politics, it might be interesting to know if he evolved in this department. Has he commented at all on his father's pre-war political career, or is this a subject he avoids? This isn't central to the story, of course, but it might be an interesting tidbit. I'll join the FAC momentarily. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 01:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem at all! The article was an interesting introduction to a figure I knew nothing about. I'll review the piece later today. If anything else comes to mind, I'll let you know. Best, -- twelsht (talk) 14:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Just wanted to draw your attention to constructive comments made by mark83 on the Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Max_Mosley#Max_Mosley page. I have had a go at some of them but I would be greatful if you could review them. Cheers (happy easter btw) Tommy turrell (talk) 18:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton
Thanks 4u1e! Taht was v. helpful Will (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Requesting peer review of PHP
I noticed that you listed yourself as a volunteer for "Applied sciences and technology" subjects for peer review. I am requesting a peer review from you for Peer review/PHP/archive2, if you have the time. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 21:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Maynard James Keenan Peer review
It's not in the genre of articles you're into, so if you don't want to review it, I totally understand. Trust. Just dropping a request, as I'm going for FA. Thanks for your consideration. Regards,  Lara  ❤  Love  05:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Copy edit request: Max Mosley
Thanks for the message on my talk page -- I will try to take a look at it this evening. – ukexpat (talk) 19:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Response
From a quick look through the discussion and the problem I noticed, I would have to agree with your concerns about copyright. The issues I have usually dealth with have been fairly clear cut, copying of large chunks of encylopaedic text, which can clearly be written in many different ways. Obviously this is is a bit different since as it's from a specific law, rewording it is not necessarily easily but I agree simply copying it in the way that was done, particularly given that this is an English translation (of a French translation?) of an Armenian law is probably not acceptable. However I don't have the time at the moment to look into it in depth, I'll try tomorrow. In the mean time, you may want to consider asking at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems to see what others say. Nil Einne (talk) 10:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

FA
Hi,

Thanks for your help with rongorongo. It's now up for FA, if you wish to comment. — kwami (talk) 01:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley
Get ready for a huge vandalism storm, in case you haven't seen the front page of todays News of The World, there's not a very nice headline involving Mosley. Someone's left a comment on the very bottom of the talkpage about it. This will almost certainly affect the FA-nom. D.M.N. (talk) 13:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's been Fully-Protected. Looks like it'll fail, with things coming out beyond our control. What a shame... D.M.N. (talk) 17:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah well, never mind it was a good attempt! I am pleased with the work that everyone had done on the article up to now. I think the detail added to it over the last 6 months to make it fair and balanced really helped keep both the pro and anti Mosley sides happy.
 * personally I’m not going to edit it (assuming it becomes unprotected) until there is a source such as ITV, BBC or possibly autosport that is prepared to touch this story.
 * I have to say I am fascinated to see if it turns out to be true!
 * I’m not sure how I feel about many journalists just resorting to cutting and pasting max’s history from his wikipedia entry!


 * BTW good work on finding more info about his political ambisions.Tommy turrell (talk) 18:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea, it's sad that the bad timing of this incident has killed this article's changes at Featured Article. Either of you 2 should leave me a message on my talk page if you have have some changes and I'll see that they get done. The admin mop thingie allows me to bypass the full protection if I can improve the article.


 * It was tough reading those last few FA comments about how horrible the article's writing is. I don't believe it's bad. I'm getting nervious about proposing Alan Kulwicki for FA if the comments are going to be that rough. Royal broil  03:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Well that was bad timing! Still, I can't deny the relevance of the story, given there's a good chance it will end his time as FIA president. Regarding cut and pasting by journalists: they're violating Wikipedia's copyright provisions if they do so. Not by copying, since Wikipedia's content is free to use, but by not acknowledging the source, and because under the GFDL license, if you copy Wiipedia's content into your work, the resulting work must be licensed under the GFDL. I'll be surprised if any of the newspapers have done that. Having said that, at a first glance I didn't see any direct lifts, other than quotes. Regarding the FA comments on writing, it's all part of the process. Laserbrain's are all pretty minor stuff, and a fair few of them are unfamiliarity with the topic (Hyphenated 'March-BMW' is of course completely normal usage in this context, for example!). Tony's are probably more serious, and tougher to fix, but he is usually correct, so it's best to just learn from the experience! 4u1e (talk) 08:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Pity about the timing; my responses at my talk. Tony   (talk)  10:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * After sleeping on it, you two have too many changes and you should do them yourself so that you can get exactly what you want. The whole "no deadline" thing. I can't wait to see how the whole "Nazi Orgy" incident will be worded. I didn't hear anything about the controversy here in the U.S., but it's easy to find on google. Royal broil  14:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Tony has written this gem and several others on his user page. Almost everyone needs to work on these areas. It probably would be a good thing for me to eventually nominate the Kulwicki article because taking some lumps would lead to me improving my writing skills! Royal broil  17:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you remember Serp91? have a read of http://www.welt.de/sport/article1860738/Der_Brief_des_Fia-Praesidenten_im_Wortlaut.html and draw your own conclusions ;-) Tommy turrell (talk) 17:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought the language use of the legal system where quite simmilar! I'm kinda going by what Mosley said about reading the blogs! But I could be quite wrong.
 * re "the embarrassment the revelations caused" - good call.Tommy turrell (talk) 12:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Alan Kulwicki review
Thanks for the information! I will get a review up for it this week. I have been having to deal with some family issues lately.

--Tlayden (talk) 18:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I have been expecting that User:Zenlax will do the review since he/she called it. There's no better training for reviewing a GAN than improving a different article to GAN. Tlayden has <50 edits total. Besides, the first person to call it should be doing the review according to the GAN rules. Royal broil  18:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, Zenlax read it and changed it to GA without comment. Thank you for your mentorship and review on this article! I'm thinking about FA for the article. Do you think that the sources would be criticized since none are book sources and many are not paper? I have at least 3 more people willing to review it. Royal broil  14:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your hints and thoughts about the article's potential at FA. I asked because I was concerned about the some of the same issues that you brought up.


 * I started another article (Eddie Hill) that I think almost already hit GA standards when it was originally started. I notice that the article has many redlinks on topics that should have been written a long time ago. Apparently there are no fans of drag racing who are Wikipedians. I'd be doing a large stretch if I started those articles because I don't have much background in drag racing. I know they're the big events but that's about all that I know. I probably don't know enough to make a stub; I could make a few sentences . Have you seen any GA articles with many redlinks? Royal broil  02:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Jim Clark
It's Pflanzgarten again - one of the anons was already flagged as a sock. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 21:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Toyota
well was a tad unfair that you did all the work! The Toyota issue isn't something i know much about, it didn't seem to generate much coverage. Max is taking up too much of my day job, I am thinking about moving on to Jean Todt or Ron Dennis (my dark horse tip for the next president! of the FIA). Anything else in the project that you have seen that is important but doesn't have much wikipedia coverage? But ideally i'd like see Max to FA first.Tommy turrell (talk) 17:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Frank Williams looks neglected a bit too. Lotus, intresting, had nearly as much tech chucked out of f1 as McLaren! Lotus was my fav team when i was a kid, I used to have a poster of a Lotus 107 on my bedroom wall!  Lotus could be difficult to seprate from Chapman though. Fango - bit before my time! Ok will give it somethought Tommy turrell (talk) 18:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * ok will do, is that the chap that used to be chummy with burnie? Didn't he run one of his mags? or maybe i am thinkin of someone else. Tommy turrell (talk) 18:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Good spot, don't notice the 300m, sounds a bit fancyful to me! it also refrers to "the first three years of Max Mosley’s life were spent in Holloway prison" but this isn't true according to "my life" by Oswald Mosley so i am sure there is lots of grounds for keeping it out.Tommy turrell (talk) 09:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Dirty Dancing Peer Review
Hi, I saw your name at WP:PRV. If you're available, I'd appreciate your comments at WikiProject Films/Peer review/Dirty Dancing. Thanks, Elonka 12:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Brabham BT19 photo


Hello again! I've just found this freely-licensed photo of a BT19 on display at the 2006 Australian GP. Might it be any use to the article?-- Diniz (talk) 08:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll upload it soon. I've also just found a new Brabham image on the Commons, which could be integrated into the team's article.-- Diniz (talk) 09:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Uploaded and available here.-- Diniz (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley, in reply
Hi, I added a reply on the talk page; thanks for including me. Wikimancer (talk) 22:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Interview of sorts?
I was wondering if I could interview you over email for my paper on collaborative writing on Wikipedia (I'm hoping to present it at Wikimania). I need a broader range of editors than I currently have and your experience writing about sports would be helpful! Awadewit (talk) 17:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Another WikiCommons Brabham image


I've just found an image of Nelson Piquet at the 1981 Monaco Grand Prix on the Commons, for your editing pleasure... ;)-- Diniz (talk) 13:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Nominate for F1POM & F1DOM
YOU can nominate for the F1 picture of the month here and F1 driver of the month here. 'Chubb 'enna itor  18:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

1995 Japanese Grand Prix
Hi 4u1e. As someone who has got a motor racing article to FA status, I was wondering whether you could peer review the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix article for me. Could you possibly make comments on the article at the PR discussion here. Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 17:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

A request
Hey there 4 - Just wondering if you could help me with some pronounciations (sp?). I am planning to make Brabham a spoken article via me and I was wondering if you could help me if some of these words:
 * Ron Tauranac - Just the surname.
 * Joachim Luhti - Surname as well.
 * l'Automobile
 * Rapier
 * perilously
 * Andrea de Adamich

Anyway, if you could just clear them up it would be much appreciated. Cheers. --Phill talk Edits Review this GA review! 15:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks 4 (and thanks RB if he sees this!) for the help. Btw, I though I'd be pronouncing the FIA bit like Italian because I'm very comfortable pronouncing Italian words although I'm not sure about French! :-p. --Phill talk Edits Review this GA review! 20:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Danica
Howdy! I didn't actually put the original NPOV box up there, just changed it to a NPOV-section box. I would guess that the section is considered non-nuetral by some as the tone sometimes seems deriding at times, probably owing to the fact that many of the cited articles/topics in the section are of a deriding/controversial nature. Obvisouly pretty girls can't racce ;) Zue Jay (talk)  03:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like User:RossF18 added the original NPOV tag. Zue Jay (talk)  03:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

What to do?
I have 2 reliable sources that contradict each other. One is a book, published my Macmillan, that consists of quotes from either the racer or someone close to them. In this case, the chapter is written by Alan Kulwicki's crew chief Paul Andrews (NASCAR). He says that Zerex backed out as sponsor at the beginning of the 1990 season. SpeedwayMedia backs him up, although it is not necessarily very reliable. Multiple other reliable sources, including Speed Channel and RacingReference.com say that they left after the 1990 season. Royal broil 13:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a great answer. I'll do more digging. There are one or two other things that have made me wonder, so I appreciate both the specific and generic answers. I don't see a certain source that consistently wrong (or shows a pattern). That is, except for the Motorsports Hall of Fame of America, which I've found to have wrong information on several different articles. I use the article carefully. I would only use it in Kulwicki's article to source that he was inducted in their Hall of Fame (if he ever becomes inducted). That's all we were able to use it for in Mario Andretti's article.  Royal broil  17:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request
Hello. I noticed that you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer in the area of sports. I would like comments on an article I have recently put up for review, SummerSlam (1988). Any help is appreciated, so if you have some time, I'd appreciate your comments here. Thanks so much! If you are not interested in reviewing the article, please ignore this message. Nikki 311 22:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Max
I've added in a couple of points about this weekends goings on (Israel and Ecclestone). Just wondered if you would check (and copy edit) my posts. I was wary about putting anything (I am hardly Mosleys biggest fan, after all) but figured I'd have a go and see. Narson (talk) 20:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I loathe him as head of the FIA but I kind of think the FIA is getting what it asked for by appointing the man. Considering who Ecclestone is pushing for his replacement, it will all be business as normal anyway. Maybe if he stays around, we might get to see some more names tossed into the ring for next years vote? But yeah, the section is getting larger and well, I can see it getting larger still when the campaigning starts ahead of the June 3rd vote. I can see Mercedes sport trying to scupper him after that 'No you are the Nazis' response. Narson (talk) 09:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ron Dennis would have made a good replacement, sadly thats not going to happen. Could always get Damon Hill in ;) Narson (talk) 09:19, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

WPF1
BetacommandBot (talk) 13:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

1995 Japanese Grand Prix
Hi 4u1e. Two people at the current FAC suggested a "comma check" should take place. Could you possibly run through the article, and add or remove any commas which you feel should or should not be there. Thanks! D.M.N. (talk) 20:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Peer review/Copyedit
Hello. I'm looking for a copyedit/peer review on the solar energy page and your name came recommended by Beagel. I'd appreciate any and all help. Mrshaba (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Get down with your real life self. I know how it is. Thanks for the note. Mrshaba (talk) 14:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Alan Kulwicki
I've gone through the article and improved every ref that I could to more reliable sources. That caused me to find more material to expand the article. For the remaining items sourced by the "less than ideal" sources, I don't think that they are controversial so they probably won't even need to be sourced. I might remove them otherwise. I'll do a spell check and final reading, then I think it's ready for FAC. Would you recommend a second peer review? Either way, would you look it over again at the FA level, especially the statements sourced by "less than ideal" sources? Thanks for your copyediting and guidance!  Royal broil  15:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

F1POM and F1DOM
You can vote for the Formula One Picture of the Month/Driver of the Month at User talk:Chubbennaitor/F1POM and User talk:Sage Callahan/F1DOM. We really need your votes as the last picture and driver was decided. 'Chubb 'enna <font face="geneva" color="#00FF00">itor  07:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Rongorongo, again
Hi 4u1e,

Rongorongo is up for FAC again. I'd appreciate your input, if you have the time. kwami (talk) 09:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for Peer Review help
Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton
I am contacting you for your thoughts as you are one of the principal contributors to this article. As you may or may not know, it has been nominated by PheonixRMB as a featured article candidate. The FAC is not going too well, with the current consensus being that the nomination is premature and that much work needs to done to get it up to the requisite standard. I would be grateful if you would express an opinion on the article's FAC candidacy page. As FAC is currently desperately short of reviewers, withdrawing the article – and thus saving reviewer time and effort – would be one option. Thanks for your time, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 16:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No action now needed as PheonixRMB has withdrawn the nomination. All the best, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 16:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thingmen
I have completed annother bit of re-writing. The more I delve into this, the more confusing it becomes, as 'Thingmen' seems to have also been used to refer to viking feudal overlords. There are also multiple stories over the unit. Anyway, rather than totally toss away all that was there, as someone had obviously done alot fo work (though only using scandanavian sources for the most part it seems), I /think/ I've got it to a good state and will port it over. What do you think? Oh, it is at User:Narson/Thingmen Narson (talk) 18:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (June)
--<font face="Forte"> Diniz (talk)  20:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

De-listing of Max Mosley
So you know, Mosley got de-listed as a GA. See its talk page for details. Narson (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Let me know if you need any citation hunting done, 4u. Narson (talk) 20:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Should that line about the legality of prostitution bein there? Looks a bit like RO, just linking to the law. Narson (talk) 14:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, it has to be renominated, what a load of crap. Narson (talk) 08:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, it is ass backwards to me to punish those who act with consensus and not those who act without. But welcome to wikipedia I guess ;) The last para needs trimming again yeah, it has got drip drip added to over the past few days. Though, he is launching libel cases now so sadly this isn't over. Narson (talk) 17:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You'd think he would at least have the curtesy to apologise to you for destroying all your hard work so callously. But then, young people these days eh? ;) Narson (talk) 17:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * There is that subtle difference between putting the blocks in the right holes and smashing them into the box any old way with a sledge hammer. I don't think it is anything worse than a mistake no, I was just taught thatwhen you make a mistake that affects someone else, you apologise. Narson (talk) 22:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * You are doing a good job. I have to admit I stay away from major edits, I dislike the man and when I have such a strong dislike I am reluctant to get in there and edit. Narson (talk) 23:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Notability of the Carmarthen Dragons
Hi 4u1e,

Could you please take a look at Talk:Carmarthen Dragons? The original author has removed the notability tags without discussion, and I would like some independent opinions about the issue.

Thanks, --Slashme (talk) 05:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Brabham photo identification
Hi 4u1e. Could you possibly take a look at this photo from the Goodwood Festival of Speed and identify the chassis for me? It has a BT44B livery, but a photo of what appears to be the same car in 2007 has been catalogued as a BT42.--<font face="Forte"> Diniz (talk)  22:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. That pesky Brabham team, modifying their cars! ;)--<font face="Forte"> Diniz  (talk)  08:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Cite tags and mosley refs
I've added in some cites to remove the last of the citation needed things, I also added a little to one sentence so it wasn't just sitting there saying something with zero context for what that meant. If this doesn't pass muster let me know. If thing isn't put back to GA, then someone deserves a good flogging (appropiately). Narson (talk) 15:01, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It may not be wht makes him notable, it /is/ what has made him famous to a wider audience. People still don't believe me when I mention his father though. Mind you, most don't even know who Oswald was. Stupid failure of state schools to teach history. Narson (talk) 23:10, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (August)
--<font face="Forte"> Diniz (talk)  21:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

1995 Japanese Grand Prix‎
Thanks for the various tweaks/copy-edits to the article. I appreciate it. D.M.N. (talk) 18:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Real Madrid
Not to sound rude or anything, but last time I checked, there was a peer review open, and I didn't want to interfere, thus giving the article more time to be improved. Now, that I've been to the talkpage, I guess the PR is closed. I will review the article tomorrow, just to let you know. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Lockdown
Thanks for the second opinion, I didn't even know about it until IMatthew said he wanted one and I saw it on nominations. I'll try to take care of everything you said. I've been working on it since June to get it to GA, this is my first article I've ever wrote. I'm tired of the freaking thing. I've asked someone for a Copyedit, as well as asked WP:PW about a copyedit. I fixed the problem you said about the reference. I had the wrong one placed there. If there is anymore problems after the copyedit, if there is one, then let me know, because I would really like to get it to GA so I can get rid of it.-- Will C  23:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * For someone who knows nothing about wrestling, you have done a very good job here in copy-editing some parts of the article. On that note, could I ask you a favour concerning another professional wrestling article. Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 14:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks your a big help. As long as I can get it to GA I'm fine with anything, besides removing a few feuds, to me they are important. If there is a good paragraph written about them then it would be okay, though I can cut down on the background by removing a few sentences or rewording them. I just want to get it done since I have to finish and nominate for GA Destination X (2008), Sacrifice (2008), Slammiversary (2008), Victory Road (2008), and Hard Justice (2008). I believe if WP:PW hadn't of began the new explaining of matches and moves then it would be a GA. I had to write out what each move and match to me was. So that might be a reason it is so messy.-- Will C  18:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm cuting down the matches in the background. I've cut the B.G. James/Kip James feud by 1/3, as well as the Kim/ODB and Kong/Saeed by the same amount. I've also cut the Xscape match down by half. I'm working on the other matches as I speak.-- Will C  22:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'm finished with everything I know to do with Lockdown. I've copyedited the entire article. I believe it is a GA but I'll let you be the judge of that.-- Will C  02:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I went through the article today and tightened up the prose. I trimmed 7,000 bytes from the article, and I believe that it reads better now. I would appreciate it if you could look it over when you have a chance and reply on the review page. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 04:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi!, how have you been? Well if you don't mind, can I get a finally answer for Lockdown, is it a GA or not? It would be great if I can get a answer because the suspense is almost unbearable. But take your time with making your decision.-- Will C  20:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello again. I saw your comments on the Lockdown review page. I just wanted to clarify that I really appreciate your help and wasn't trying to criticize you. You did a great job of identifying areas for improvement. The review has been a little different, as a second opinion request is usually just a request for clarification, but the original reviewer seems to have assumed that you were taking over the review altogether. I totally understand that real life commitments need to take priority, so please don't worry about this review. Someone will come along soon, so things will be fine. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your help. Nice people like you who don't have to give an opinion or help a user with an article are rare. So thanks for your time, and I hope to run into you down the road.-- Will C  03:20, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley
Hi, I've reviewed and relisted Max Mosley as a GA. Good work on addressing the concerns raised! Regards, Resolute 21:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Congrats man. Sorry I wasn't more help. Narson (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:4u1e&action=edit&section=62 Editing User talk:4u1e (section) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Hi, I don't understand why you reverted the reference to the judgment. I looked at some of the other links and I didn't find the judgment text in any of these pages; moreover, even the neutral citation of the judgment is missing in the current article. Apokrif (talk) 01:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The BBC link has the damages listed I believe. There is a preference for secondary over primary sources. Narson (talk) 09:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No original research: "Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used in Wikipedia". Bailii and the High Court are reliable sources for some topics (in particular, for the contents of High Court judgments), but it is questionable whether the BBC is a reliable secondary source for legal topics (what is sure is that the BBC, as to the contents of the High Court judgments, cannot be more reliable than the High Court). I'm not saying that we should not also give a link to the BBC site (or any other source), but that we should provide the reader with the more comprehensive and reliable source avaiblable (which is done in many other WP articles which link to judgments, and AFAIK these links are usually not deleted). There is much less data about the facts and the legal reasoning on the BBC site than in the judgment. It's true that a pdf of the judgment is linked from the BBC site, but (1) it's on a less reliable site than BAILII and (2) neither the current WP article nor the BBC article gives the neutral citation number of the judgment (the BBC doesn't even give it's date) so it will be hard to find it as soon as the link is no longer valid. Apokrif (talk) 01:49, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In general, Narson is right: we use secondary sources at WP because primary ones offer no interpretation. In this particular case, no interpretation of the facts is required, so it doesn't really matter whether we use a primary or secondary source (my view anyway!). Either would do. My only concern was that the facts in question (That Mosley won the case, the quote from the judge and the amount of the damages awarded) were already covered by the existing source and a second source was unnecessary. If you want to swap the BBC source for the High Court one, Apokrif, I'll have no objection (assuming that it's a reliable source, I haven't checked). Thanks again for taking an interst in the article. 4u1e (talk) 07:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't want to swap, but to add: each of both sources contains info that is not in the other one. Apokrif (talk) 10:35, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Not in terms of what they are referencing in the article, unless I'm missing something? 4u1e (talk) 16:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Resolute, that wasn't a proper review, as a result the article's been sent back to GAN. The reviewer also failed to create a subpage, thus screwing up the article. See this and this for more info. D.M.N. (talk) 07:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Considering the shit storm for GAN, can you imagine the FAC? The very gates of hell would freaking open or some crap. And I thought getting John Lewis to deliver th right furniture undamaged was difficult. Narson (talk) 21:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The forms...
...must be obeyed. And filled out. In triplicate. This is meaningless bureaucracy really, le sigh. Narson (talk) 09:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * We got any clue as to what is going on? I'm still lost. It really makes me want to attack spectre with a whiffle bat for causing all this. Narson (talk) 21:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Motor Sport digital archive
Hi 4u1e. This is a bit of an off-the-wall question, but would you recommend the Motor Sport digital archive CDs? It's my birthday soon and I was thinking of buying one or more of the decade ones.--<font face="Forte"> Diniz (talk)  19:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply - it sounds like a good resource, and I think that I may go for the 1980s CD.--<font face="Forte"> Diniz (talk)  17:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley under GA Review
Hello. I'd like to inform you that I have decided to review Max Mosley against the Good article criteria to determine whether it should be relisted as a Good Article. As you know, this article was nominated by User:Giggy on your behalf after it survived a reassessment. The review process may take up to seven days. I will let you know when my first review is complete. Thank you, Robert Skyhawk (Talk) 19:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Mario Andretti
There's a lot of complaining happening on the article's talk page about with birth city with the whole Italy vs. Croatia. Another opinion would be very helpful. Do you understand WP:NCGN?  Royal broil  15:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

September issue Newsletter
Hope you enjoy. <font face="geneva" color="#6699FF">Chubb <font face="geneva" color="#7DF9FF">enna itor  08:25, 29 August 2008 (UTC)