User talk:BrianDeeG/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Welcome to Wikipedia Brian! Come by the Teahouse for help anytime!

Hello! BrianDeeG, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! SarahStierch (talk) 21:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey Brian! Glad you see you found a few projects to join - I'm impressed. You know where you find us when you need something :) Happy Wikipediaing... SarahStierch (talk) 22:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you again, Sarah. --Brian (talk) 22:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

Hi. When you recently edited Bill Shankly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alex James (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:54, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks and I won't remove the facility which is useful. --Brian (talk) 19:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Invite

As part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, a new Football In Scotland task force has been set up. As you edit articles on Scottish football, I would like to invite you to become a member. The task force is a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Scottish football. If you would like to participate, please visit the task force page for details of how to join. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 08:47, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Your welcome, I'm actually a Chelsea fan but my contributions don't necessarily reflect that. Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 08:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey!

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at Wikipedia:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you either received an invitation to visit the Teahouse, or edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests page.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host, 15:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Message sent with Global message delivery.

How's the cricket going?

	How's the cricket going?
	Hi Brian...how's the cricket going? :) Sarah (talk) 02:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Verity, etc

Thanks for the compliments. To answer your points: My general approach when writing a cricket biography is first to see what is out there. I do a search for any books about them and see if there are any major sources which I can get hold of. I try to read all of these. Then I, where possible, look at things like general histories (i.e. History of Yorkshire CCC for Verity, books of obituaries) to see what they have to say about the person's context within the wider "subject". Or, for someone like Len Hutton, I look at things like histories of amateur/professional cricket, or studies of England captains. To be honest, the only people about whom I have written who have autobiographies are Hammond and Hutton and I have not used these much; mainly because anything interesting they had to say has been included in biographies. I am usually a little cautious about autobiographies, and I think they are slightly "frowned upon"; the danger is that they may be perceived to be self-serving, and need supplementing with other stuff. As for internet stuff, I tend to use internet versions of text sources like Wisden or stats archives. I don't use much other online information. As for external links, the convention is to only list sites there which are not used as references in the article; other web references are just cited in the references rather than the bibliography as each time it is used is to the same place (like citing several facts to the same page of a book). As for review, I often try to get a few people to have a quick look at it, then go for GA before PR as GA is easier to pass. Some people go for PR, then GA, then PR again, then FA. It is always worth having a PR before nominating for FA. If I can be of any further help, please let me know; I do a fair amount of reviewing of sports articles. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Rewrite (visual novel) "review"

You cannot be serious. You have not even reviewed the article and just quick failed it. First of all, the first review was from when the article was not even like how it is today, and shouldn't have been done in the first place. Second, having Japanese-language references doesn't mean it's unverifiable, and any blog posts that were used came from official sources, such as the brand that developed the game. Besides, the vast majority of the references are either from the official website of the game, or third-party sources related to the game or its various media. I did not wait over 4 months to get this article reviewed so an editor with very little experience would quick fail it.--十八 21:23, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Perfectly serious. I cannot possibly check verification when the citations are nearly all links to Japanese language websites, which may (or not) be directly connected to the product. One of the few I can check goes to an Amazon equivalent and I do not believe Amazon (like IMDB and similar) can be accounted a reliable site for review purposes. MOS requires that verification is provided mainly by third party books and you have not provided a bibliography. I use quickfail criteria on first reading and this article simply cannot meet the verifiability requirments. --Brian (talk) 06:13, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Bill Shankly

I noticed that you have put this article up for GA, and it looks generally good. Further to the conversation we had a while ago, I think it may still be a little too reliant on his autobiography. I think it needs a little more variety (for GA, I think only a little more from Kelly would be enough, but for FA I suspect a trawl through this may be necessary). One excellent source is the ODNB; not only does it give a really good overview, it also lists its sources. The article is here if you have access through a library. If not, I would recommend getting access as it is a fantastic resource, and would help very nicely for GA. If no-one gets to it soon, I may well review it myself; sourcing apart, it looks an excellent piece of work and I look forward to FS Trueman!. Sarastro1 (talk) 14:24, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback, Sarastro. I agree about the autobiography. I should have used the biography first but I did it the wrong way around. When time allows, I'll work through Kelly again to replace some of the citations. The main online source is the tribute in the LFC site which I've used. There may be more. I'll think about the ONDB but I have no library access. --Brian (talk) 18:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I have failed the article given there was no response from you (I'm guessing on vacation?) since I put the article on hold; feel free to make changes suggested in the review, renominate and give me a ring – I would be more than happy to review this again. Lemonade51 (talk) 18:40, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Invite to the African Destubathon

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations \| June 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Wikipedians interested in St Mirren F.C.

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedians interested in St Mirren F.C. indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm happy to let it go. Obviously no Buddies editing! Brian (talk) 10:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)