User talk:ChrisGualtieri/Archive 3

GAN for Taiko
Hi Chris-- I know your speciality is in Anime and Manga, but I wanted to ask if you might consider reviewing the good article nomination for the article on taiko, which I've been trying to improve over the last month or so. If you're not interested, that's completely fine, but if you have any suggestions on how the article might be improved, feel free to make changes or suggest them to me. I, JethroBT drop me a line 21:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll do it on my days off, but I'll put in a request for the books through the library to double check sources and content. For a complete review it may take me more than a week to assemble the sources and a few additional ones. The page is far better than the Japanese one, but theomission some kanji terms and the use of shaku without the context can be confusing. Also, historical musical pieces played on the drum would be nice to have for some context. Usage in popular culture should probably included instead of a "see also" and Taiko no Tatsujin is deserving of a few lines itself. Some additional sources I'd like to see consulted include: And so on an so forth. The further reading section should definately be worked in for more competing views and scope. The article is indeed good, but for type of musical instrument the "broad" aspect becomes rather FA like because it cannot be comprehensive on a single page unless it deals with the whole. With that being said, the types are fairly well covered, but so much commentary and insight into the drums. The drum makers are absent, and so is details on the construction and drum materials. The wood is perfectly fine, but I see nothing on the drumhead. So its indeed good, but its got some missing content still. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Chris, great suggestions. (I was nodding my head the whole way through reading your response!)  I'll get started on some these issues right away.  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 02:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * And to think I was just rambling on for a few moments about some observations! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems a number of these topics are not accessible online (or just in snippets without sufficient context), so it's off to the library for me as well! I, JethroBT  drop me a line 19:17, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The resource exchange board would probably get most of those. WP:RX has helped me out before. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll check this out. I do have database access, so that should be OK for the articles.  Most of the books are accessible to me through the Chicago Public Library too, so it's just a matter of waiting.  One thing I want to point out is that it may be helpful (at some point) to fork some content on some of the types of drums because they are so common (e.g. there was already a page on shime-daiko before I started improving this one).  Not sure how you want to factor this consideration into the GAN, but I certainly understand the need for breadth for a musical instrument (though in this case, it's a very wide variety of instruments).  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 20:34, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You'll have the burden of being broad, whereas individual articles on specific types of drums will have to be more specific on the individual development and construction. A FA or GA on a musical instrument is not an easy thing to do, much less a foreign instrument. In a sense, the article almost already surpasses parts of the GA aspect, but filling a few holes in would make it better, since they have been pointed out. I just have to go through one or two more books tonight and I'll pick up the review. I've got to return 6 books to the library by the 8th and 1 by the 4th that I haven't only begun reading. Adult Manga by Sharon Kinsey is the book I need to rewrite manga because it has a lot of coverage on the development and industry of adult-targeted comics (not pornographic either) and I got Anime Classics Zettai and I still got to review Anime Explosion. On the 9th my Little Boy book has to go back as well. I got only 6 others due by November after that, but I had to do three books on the 2nd so I blew through them in two days and got plenty of notes and material scattered on my desk and computer. I take my research very seriously; I do GA fairly to the criteria, but if you get it to FA level, I could be a demanding person and offer additional notes and back and forth about commentary. You do realize that in my anime and manga research that I typically find publication errors and sometimes solve decades old mysteries through studious research? Asking me to review something I take an interest in is a sure-fire way to make sure its vetted and checked against anything and everything I can get my hands on. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That sounds great-- I like a thorough review. I think you will find me a very receptive person to improvements and suggestions.  I may have questions for clarification, but I don't try to fight tooth and nail over every little thing.  It will be helpful to have another head in this, too, because I've already come across some discrepancies in the literature on certain matters (e.g. just today, I've come across conflicts over what constitutes "traditional" construction of drums...also considering that it might be better to just avoid the word "traditional" altogether in some spots here).  In any case, I'm in this for the long haul, so I'm committed to making improvements for GA (and eventually FA) for as long as it takes.  This was article had zero citations when I started working on it and a giant bibliography at the bottom...a great deal of which are unreliable sources.  I've done a lot, but as you say, there's work left to do.  Let's just say I like a good challenge, so I'm ready for your scrutiny.  : )  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 21:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I've scored a cache of documents and I noticed some Wikiproject mess so I'm going to be fixing a bunch of things up while I wait for the books to come in. I'm going to take the GAN now, but it will be some time before I get everything I need. Do you mind the wait? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:24, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem-- just keep me posted on when you think you might get officially started. I just stopped by the library yesterday to place a hold on the books I need (which are Varian's Way of Taiko and Bender's Taiko Boom.  In the meantime, I can start adding information from the sources you scrounged up above.  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 17:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I am going to see what I can do on Wiki while I wait for mediation and the books. I think fixing the WP:USA assessment and making it functional and worth checking will be a good side project. I'm like the only person who cares to do such work on Wikipedia, but losing it would be bad because a high level project sort function is better than a bunch of low level ones for international studies and focus. If there is a fault with the organization and operation of a system, many people will abandon or call for its removal rather than its fixing simply because cleaning it up takes longer than passing it into obscurity or removing it entirely. Which ironically, would take more work at this point. Why few people appreciate such things is beyond me, but it is a good feeling to have your hard work be useful to someone, right? A scholarly topic on Taiko does more for the education and appreciation of the work than playing in some band or giving some speeches. Wikipedia is a good platform in that sense, but the goal is to represent the sum of all human knowledge and have easy accessibility to that information. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:09, 4 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Books just came in today, so I'll be getting started with some more substantial edits this weekend. I've also started to incorporate information from the sources above.  How are things on your end?  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 13:09, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Library called about one of the books two days ago, I won't be getting my Asian music in North America book. Apparently the library that had it listed cannot find it in its records. Sad to say, but I think JSTOR and MUSE requests at the RX would be all I have unless you can send a copy or scan to me through email or something just so I can peer review it. Though it is not necessary and is likely more trouble than it is worth. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * There are a few I can e-mail you, actually (I have some access to databases from grad school). I'll do that now.  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 16:27, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Chris-- sorry that I haven't been able to get book scans to you yet. I've been tied up at work!  Do you still think you have time to do the Taiko review?  I see you have lots of things on your plate right now...  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 01:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That's alright. We are both busy, but if you can get the book scans in a few days time, I'll hold off. I didn't want to rush you or cause concern by not being responsive or alarming other editors about the time delay in the review process. As you can see, I have been really busy, but I usually print out GANs and go through them line by line during my lunch breaks and mark them up in red to prepare my review. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, just want to confirm that you got the scans from me. Any idea when you might be able to start the review?  There's a couple things I still need to add from your suggestions above.  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 21:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Chris-- just checking in again. If you need to back out of looking over the GAN for any reason, that's totally fine.  But if you think you have the time to spare, that's great.  Just wanted to see where you were at.  Thanks,  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 15:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Have you added everything you wanted? I've been really busy, but just let me know when your set and I'll reveal it from there - I do have the scans. Sorry for the delay. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:52, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll be adding some things in this evening on Taiko no Tatsujin and (hopefully) something on a historical piece or two, the latter of which I can probably draw from Yatai-bayashi. I, JethroBT  drop me a line 14:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * OK Chris, I'm ready to go. I still have the books on me (I renewed them!), so if there is more content that is missing, I should be able to add it in as you go through the GAN.  Will you be able to start soon?  I, JethroBT  drop me a line 03:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Will post it tomorrow! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:20, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film)/GA1
I left a important message there. Please be quick and clean up the plot in 2 days, otherwise, I've to fail that article. Regards, --Jionpedia  ✉  19:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I've left comments there. Will pass the article after the problems have been resolved, but please do it quickly. Regards, --Jionpedia  ✉  12:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Fostering through Social Enterprise (FtSE)
Hi Chris, A while back (27 February 2012) you declined a submission because it was not adequately supported by reliable sources: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Fostering_Through_Social_Enterprise. I've just added some verifiable sources, such as The Guardian, The Telegraph, as well as a number of national charities. I hope that this submission now satisfies notability requirements. I wondered if you might be able to take another pass at it? Thanks in advance. LizHawkins (talk) 22:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Appears to meet the bare minimum in terms of content and sourcing for the presumption of notability. I have moved it to mainspace. It still needs development, but after a year from its first submission the continued improvement and coverage in sources bodes well for the future. Keep up the good work! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Question about edits to Chase Paymentech Page
Hi Chris, I was alerted that you made some edits to the Chase Paymentech page today (thanks!) and just wanted to ask a few quick questions. What was changed? Did you notice something I did wrong in the setup/editing that I should keep in mind moving forward? I am fairly new to contributing to Wikipedia, so I am doing my best to make sure I am doing everything right. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvb (talk • contribs) 21:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I fixed the template and bolded the name. I just noticed a broken wiki link for things like JP Morgan Chase, just make brackets around them and it will link it like this JP Morgan Chase and it will work. You do not need to provide the URL. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:58, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film)
The article Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jionpedia -- 07:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Million Awards
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yay! Thank you! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually, looking again at your user page, we actually owe you the big one, and a Hall of Fame spot, too! Sorry I missed this previously; it looks like it passed while I was on wikibreak. Anyway, it's amazing how many readers you're helping with these articles--I hope you keep it up! Cheers again, Khazar2 (talk) 11:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:


 * Thanks again! I'm doing all that I can to help out; I might have some more in a week or twos time. I'll keep at it! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:51, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Awesome, good luck! -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:52, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Template talk:Non-free review
An RfC about the use of the fairusereview tag on mainspace pages is in progress here. From 2005 until recently, this template was added to file pages when the non-free status of the file was being discussed. In May this year it was edited so that it could be added to articles. The RfC question is: should the template be reverted to the pre-May 2013 version, and retained only for use on file pages?

Since you are a registered member of the Fair Use WikiProject, you might have an interest in this discussion. Tom Reedy (talk) 04:30, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Dragon Ball (anime) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Mike Reynolds, Mike Shepherd, Don Brown, Jeffrey Watson and Naoko Watanabe

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Tennis article whitespaces
I noticed you are removing whitespaces from the events section of tennis articles. I'm not intimately familiar with the guidelines regarding this formatting issue but the whitespaces are there to increase the readability of the articles. Without the whitespaces the events section becomes one big blob of text that is much harder to scan and read compared to the same section with whitespaces. Compare e.g. the 1970 South African Open (tennis) article with (1) and without (2) whitespaces.--Wolbo (talk) 18:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * These are extra breaks, they are rendering and they should not be per WP:MOS. Also, links like hard courts should simply be Hard courts . This type of additional lines of nothing but whitespace breaks the reading flow and I do not know why you are saying this makes it easier to read, when the text is simply and inexplicably separated from further. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Stan Gibilisco
I've just created an article about TAB Books that contains a minor link to Stan Gibilisco. I removed your "dead end" tag because it doesn't apply any longer. Probably another tag is needed, since there's now only one teeny-tiny link to him, but I don't know what it might be. Lou Sander (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Dead end is for lack of outgoing links where "orphan" is less than 3 incoming links from other pages. The tag only details the problem and not the fix; it is not meant to be a form of punishment or method for continual directed improvement based on the whims of editors. Thanks for fixing it, I was doing a quick run with AWB and it places them if they qualify and it is very hard to tell otherwise. Thanks for fixing it. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:14, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

Unfixing
Hi,

Not sure what you've got AWB set up to do, but the "fixes" labeled General Fixes + CheckWiki 75 using AWB are messing up articles. Specifically, it seems that AWB is messing up the conversion of colon-plus-asterisk to just asterisks. I noted it at several articles you'll see I reverted. — kwami (talk) 04:17, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

It can't handle ::*. But sometimes there's a reason for having this rather than asterisks, as at Berber languages, and it shouldn't be "fixed". — kwami (talk) 04:26, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Would you mind explaining why you are replacing indented bullet points, coded as ":* ", with "** ". Instead of indenting cleanly, this introduces an unnecessary asterix. Thanks. --Epipelagic (talk) 05:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * According to CHECKWIKI, "The article had a list, where one line is indent (:* text). A list doesn't need an indent with ":". Use more "*" to indent the list." and it seems to be under WP:L. I'll hold off, because I don't know why it broke down after triple or quad asterisks, but as you can tell from the mark up, below, it doesn't need the semicolons. Check when you respond or view it for proof.


 * Is one indent
 * Is two indents
 * Is three indents
 * Is four indents
 * Is five indents...etc
 * And it doesn't make a separate bullets. I think the issue is somewhere in the text of the coding. I'll take a look into it, but semicolons are not needed and they seem to confuse the software when in lists. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh and I'm holding off on doing any more, simply because I think the formatting is to blame and the issue is the software considering each one as a new list and making extra bullets where there need not be any. As you can see, unneccessary line breaks cause the problem and I didn't have it tighten those up.


 * 1


 * 2

See? It is the line breaks that seem to be responsible, but having no line breaks is fine and does not change the formatting on the page. So its a combination error because one is trying to override the other. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 12:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 3 (spaced with line break)

Tips for the Dyslexia Page:
Psychiatrists are given a cursory overview of dyslexia in our training -- child psychiatrists get a little more training in it. Psychiatrists and mental health practitioners typically handle associated problems like ADHD. Treating dyslexia itself is handled mostly by educational psychologists and reading specialists. Neuroscientists, neuropsychologists, and educational psychologists do the research on it.

That being said,

First I'd go to pubmed to get a decent overview:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002379/

There's also the page below -- which is a nice, simple overview:

http://www.dyslexia.yale.edu/whatisdyslexia.html

Looking over the Wikipedia dyslexia article, I'd say the introduction has some problems:

1) It's top-heavy -- i.e., it starts with a lot of jargon rather than, in simple language, defining the types of 'difficulties with words' that people with dyslexia have. The intro should be written in more user-friendly language. In my opinion, the best article I've seen so far that does this in the medical section, is the "Schizophrenia" article. The wiki-linked jargon should be kept, but used in sentences that define it later on.

2) It then goes on to introduce stuff that, since it's controversial, should be addressed in a controversies section or another relevant section in the body, not the intro.

3) As you probably know, the introduction should be simple with known and undisputed facts about dyslexia.

The rest of the article isn't organized very well. Some of the sections are vague and could be written in more simple, direct sentences. Even some long sub-sections could be summarized in a couple compact sentences.

Unfortunately, because of time constraints, I can't work on that article. But I'm confident you'll do a great job! If you have any other questions related to Wikipedia articles don't hesitate to ask.Youtalkfunny (talk) 05:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

One thing I'd like to add: Look on Pubmed for 'Review' articles that summarize the current field's knowledge of dyslexia also.Youtalkfunny (talk) 05:50, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

PS: My apologies. I didn't see how many great things you've contributed yourself 'til now -- so if the end of my first comment sounded lame: It was! Anyway, given that you're an ace on Wikipedia, hope suggestions helped somewhat.Youtalkfunny (talk) 06:28, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 230,000 edits doesn't make me an expert; I still make mistakes and I do a lot of things around here that classify as janitorial work! It was an interesting conversation that lead me to look up books on the matter and I found Davis's work to be enlightening - making dyslexia into a gift that the individual distorts into a disability by lack of proper training, even before they enter school. That article is not representative of my work; I noticed its issues so that is why I wanted to work on it. I've been watching your progress on the article and dropped a line - and with good reason - you've been a great help already! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:18, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * you need to avoid the USA skewed idea of dyslexia based on the needs of the Orton Gilligham organisation and its marketing agencies and friendly universities, and look at the International Dyslexia research from outside the skewing influences of the dyslexia industry. have a look at the CiteULike Developmental Dyslexia research paper sharing library. And the Alexia (acquired dyslexia) Library, and the Reading: acquiring and developing the skills and abilties library. And if you want PubMed sources you could have a look at the Dyslexia subsection of my user page which includes a wide range of PubMed research paper collections So go read the international research regarding dyslexia from around the world, which is what Wikipedia is supposed to reflect. dolfrog (talk) 13:55, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Agreed.
Yes, I couldn't agree more. Part of what I try to do professionally is help people see differences as gifts.Youtalkfunny (talk) 20:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * pure marketing hype dolfrog (talk) 13:41, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ghost in the Shell (film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ghost in the Shell (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- 21:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:02, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

User talk pages
If you do not want me to post here, then kindly do me the same favor.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 03:09, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I am required to post certain messages and you did not ask. You re-instituted your revert without citing a reason and without discussion when I had already posted to the talk page. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:13, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You are not required to warn me that I am edit warring when I only made one revert that I backed up with policy.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 14:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bleach (anime), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2x2 (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) 09:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014
Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe. Could be fun, but stressful though. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Up to you. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I'll decide probably by December. It depends on whether or not I have to go through the Arb Com process with Ryulong and likely a handful of A&M editors. I could probably do a hundred or more GAs if I put everything else I did on hold. But we will see. Right? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Do what you have to do. The deadline for signing up, I think, is 31 January 2014, just like this year's competition. Whatever you do though, make sure you write those hundred or more GAs ;) --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:45, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hehe. I can really bug my local library for a lot of materials on some pretty obscure stuff. I'm not to familiar with the Wikicup, but I'm sure my other maintenance and helping edits don't count for anything. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

A giant step back
I have proposed that an RfC take place in which both combatants in the anime/manga article structure debacle state their positions and then let the community work it out from there.

Considering that, if this long-festering dispute does not abate, this will get to ArbCom, and ArbCom almost certainly will put a year long or indefinite topic ban on both of you (or a siteban, although that's less likely), I would strongly encourage you to run with this idea.

Please indicate at that thread whether or not you would be willing to participate in such a discussion. Please indicate only your answer to that question, as I don't want the proposal to become yet another venue for the interpersonal conflict to play out.

Yours,  S ven M anguard   Wha?  16:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!
 S ven M anguard  Wha?  06:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to say...
... that this - specifically the part where you say that for the good of Wikipedia you'd rather be personally topic-banned, rather than mutually topic-banned - is one of the classiest things I've seen on here all year. As we say in the Khazar house with fake Australian accents, "Good on ya, mate." -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

RfC
You and Ryulong now have your RfC, for the record I was going to withdraw my support for the topic ban but when I came on just a few ago I saw that it was held off so It is moot now. Chris I still want to help you and Ryu come to an agreement if the issue is MOSANIME then as I said before throw out your proposals in the RfC and gain consensus from the community to help improve it =). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:57, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, pleaseconsult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:46, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Polyphyodont
hi, first of all thanks for improving on the article, a little note on removing stub templates which in itself is correct, the templates often keep articles in a category, in this case the Animal anatomy category dropped of. Cheers Mion (talk) 10:30, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

RfC has started
The RfC is now public, and can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/franchise coverage RfC.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  20:51, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ghost in the Shell (film)
The article Ghost in the Shell (film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Ghost in the Shell (film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- 22:11, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA noms
Hi Chris, I'm settled in and have internet set up now in my new house. I haven't seen any changes to NGE since I responded to you on the review page, and there are still issues you haven't touched. Can you give me a sense of your plan for completing the articles I've reviewed? I would recommend that you hold off on nominating new articles for review until after we've wrapped these up. Regards, Lemurbaby (talk) 10:31, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I was asking for direction for the NGE one. I do not know what the problem is. And as you can tell, the Ghost in the Shell film GAN actually precedes your GAN reviews, it just was taken. And is actually about to pass. I'd like to focus on the NGE and anime ones. Since NGE is really close can you please tell me what is needed for the NGE one to pass?, I do not think the hentai one will be able to pass given your request. Hentai had been up before all the others and I hate to see it fail - I'd hate for any of them to fail, but I can go all out on the anime page if you request as well. Just say the word. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:13, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't intend to fail any of them - it's just a matter of you deciding how you'd like to tackle the workload. It's fine to start with NGE first. I'm not clear on what sort of additional information you need to improve the article. There are still suggestions and recommendations in the GA review that don't seem to have been addressed. If they aren't crossed off, it means they still need attention. If you believe you've addressed an issue and I haven't noticed the change, point it out and I will have another look. If there is anything unclear, let me know. Lemurbaby (talk) 15:48, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Yay, thanks! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Such a shame that was a sockpuppet.Lucia Black (talk) 16:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

A strange one
Hi ChrisGualtieri, hope you're well. If you're not too busy, would you be able to look in at User talk:Quadell? A very odd situation, regarding a new Harrison biography, which … well, it basically rips off Wikipedia's Harrison album and song articles. Strange but true.

What I'm hoping is, you might want to hit "helpful" on my Amazon review – which I've signed as "HariG", and which is linked from Quadell's page. In the interests of drawing attention to this issue, I'd simply like to ensure that the review is helpful/popular enough to register in the listing's main space. Quite understand if you'd rather not of course. Many thanks. Best, JG66 (talk) 18:00, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Can you help please
Dear Chris, Someone has blocked me out of the page about John Dalli. The fact is that there are contributors who are vandalising this site with intent to damage Mr. Dalli. I tried to compile a factual description of his achievements and of the events that led to problems in his political life. I tried to reference the contribution profusely. I would like my contribution to be included and protected from vandalism by the likes of "Demdem" and "ritche333".

I would appreciate some help --Trabixu (talk) 18:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Trabixu
 * I'd discuss at Talk:John Dalli. Also semi-protected means you need to be on the site for 4 days before you can edit those - its a means to stop IP vandals from continuing with newly registered accounts. Also the first two edits hit the filter for vandalism. There was a lot of WP:BLP issues and a lack of sources. If you mean well, you'll need to discuss and cite your sources. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

WP:ORDER
Hello. Please note that navigation templates are placed underneath the external links. Also note that a navigational box is only meant to be included in pages which are linked to it, not to every single article that is relevant to the navigational box's subject. --Omnipaedista (talk) 09:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * AWB moved it to that position, perhaps it was missing an intermediary move check. I'm not positive what happened or why. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess you added it using append text. So it was manual edit using AWB and not an automatic behaviour. Remember, you take full responsibility of your edits when using AWB. Maybe enabling "sort meta data after" helps you. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:07, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

 * Thanks, but I didn't do that much. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:33, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

New section on the Anime and Manga RfC
Hello there. Since the Anime and Manga RfC seems to have developed a consensus for the "It depends on notability and uniqueness of each adaptation", I have started a thread to see if we can offer metrics or further guidance for such case by case... erm... cases. I have no idea if such a thing is even possible to draft up, but since having it might help, I figured I'd try. The thread is HERE, and as a previous participant in the RfC I wanted to let you know about it using this overly long, rambling message.

Since the RfC has been going very well, and at this point I've seen no indications that it's going to get all flamey, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't offer suggestions in this section, if you have any.

Cheers,  S ven M anguard   Wha?  17:07, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

RfC
the RfC is related to whether anime adaptations or any various adaptation can be split from the original given between the circumstances of Dragon Ball, and Bleach animes. It is unrelated to Ghost in the shell, which is having the original media as primary topic.Lucia Black (talk) 01:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've asked you to stay off my page. Your pushing of the matter more than three times in a year has been met with no consensus each time. I have nothing more to say to you. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:38, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Why the fuck did you have to move it to "Ghost in the Shell (franchise)"?—Ryulong (琉竜) 08:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Love Inspired, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seventh Heaven (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) 09:11, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

AWB
Hi I have revoked your AWB access, due to editing controversially with it. AWB is not for anything controversial, and is not to be used for actions that have no visible effect. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:09, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll respond on your talk page. There seems to be a misunderstanding. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:05, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Move
I've undone your recent move of Ghost in the Shell since a request to undo it was filed at WP:RMTR. It seems that an RfC is in progress at Talk:Ghost in the Shell and I recommend that all parties wait for consensus before doing further moves. If you believe that the discussion has reached consensus you can ask at WP:AN for it to be formally closed by an admin. An alternative is to open up a regular move discussion that will cause the question to be listed at WP:RM. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:32, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * As someone who opposed a merger, the reason here was an attempt at a compromise between the "no merge" and "merge" sides. Also, there was not RFC on the merge, it was merely a discussion which resulted in no consensus to merge. This was the fourth merge discussion this year and repeatedly people have pointed to DISAMB as a solution. After Lucia Black tried to force her the merge anyways, I opted for that. The RFC on whether or not pages Should anime and manga adaptations of the same work share a page or be split into multiple articles? is still ongoing, but a clear reading of consensus resulted in "It depends on notability and uniqueness of each adaptation." Though that is irrelevant to this discussion and while I did want the pages to remain stable during the RFC, Lucia's prodding and the four or five who supported a disambiguation in the current and previous mergers seemed to be a reasonable course of action. You have reverted my bold merge; so discussion into the DISAMB should begin properly - as merging is "no consensus". Let it be known, I prefer a "franchise" article - the actual edit I did, went against my own very belief in "what's best for Wikipedia". It was a shot to resolve the problem, it failed, let's try something else. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:28, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Yadkin River bridges
There's no link to it on the page, but I was wondering if you would contribute to the discussion of whether the article should be split into Yadkin River Veterans Memorial Bridge and Wil-Cox Bridge. The second bridge is historic and I am told that makes it notable.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 19:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ghost in the Shell (video game)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ghost in the Shell (video game) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Niwi3 -- 20:52, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ghost in the Shell (video game)
The article Ghost in the Shell (video game) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Ghost in the Shell (video game) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Niwi3 -- 23:08, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

MIT Sloan School of Management
Hi Chris, I´m trying to add Professor Arnoldo Hax to the Notable Current and Former Faculty in the MIT Sloan School of Management wiki. Professor Hax is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Management, Emeritus and a Professor of Technological Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and Strategic Management. He is well known professor in the MIT community for his contributions in the strategic area and the invention of the Delta Model. How can I add him to the list? best Mingodoy (talk) 20:29, 13 November 2013 (UTC)mingodoy

Your GA nomination of Ghost in the Shell (film)
The article Ghost in the Shell (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ghost in the Shell (film) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- 23:32, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! Lucia Black should get one to. She is another major contributor to that page from further back in its history. She's just been busy with me responding to Ghost in the Shell (video game)'s GAN. GAN review looks hopeful though for that, passed and failed within 3 hours over minor stuff... but alas. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:16, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

That's not my article
See the history.Danger^Mouse (talk) 06:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Weird. AFC helper script bugged out a bit. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:32, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

re: Ghost in the Shell (video game)
Hi, a reviewer may quick-fail the nomination if he/she thinks the article has serious issues (see Good article nominations/Instructions). You put it on hold only if the article has a few issues, which is not the case of this article. --Niwi3 (talk) 23:36, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Serious issues? Most of yours are already fixed. The very content you were lacked was actually stripped out because Anime and Manga people think it is "redundant", when articles are supposed to be self-contained. I fixed the dead ref with a simple archive, wording fixes are done, more than half your list is already addressed in a mere 15 minutes from me getting online. How is this "serious" and warranting a quick fail after you already did the review? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * There are still major issues to be fixed. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. --Niwi3 (talk) 23:48, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I think I am being reasonable for you to give the standard week or discuss the fixes that have already been done. You are essentially failing this because a link went 404 in the months since the GAN was posted and that was fixed. A few minor content things have already been added and the formatting and details have been corrected. You did this much work to review it, why are you walking away from it now that the fixes are done? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:51, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Look, I did what I though was right. And the gameplay section still needs to be expanded and referenced. If you agree, fine. If you don't, you can always re-nominate the article. --Niwi3 (talk) 23:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * As will I, I've waited for months and it just seems like a giant waste of time if you will not even engage when most of your list is resolved in mere minutes. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:08, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Niwi3 is right gameplay needs needed to be expanded, but should've given it a week or whatever. --Niemti (talk) 12:15, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

peace
 i want peace, and i recognize you have a lot of useful information that can benefit the articles. All i ask is that we remain civil from now on. and if one is uncivil incidentally, one "informs" the other in the talkpage what is considered offensive, and we'll modify the message that best sends the appropriate message. Lucia Black (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Thank you! That's so kind. All past issues are wiped clean. Sorry that I'm stubborn and a bit thick at times because of my academic leanings - I'm going to diversify some so I don't become overwhelming in the space. The Wikicup will see to much of that. I'm glad we are able to work in the area together - the film article and the video game article are greatly improved by bouncing off ideas and working together. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:51, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Orphan tag
Hello ChrisGualtieri, do you have looked at the article before inserting orphan tag? --Godewind (talk) 10:52, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Orphan is not outgoing links, but incoming links. This means that no other pages link to it. The tag is actually from checking the "what links here" or using AWB to check. In this case it was the latter. The tag can and will be removed when it is no longer an orphan. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, links added. --Godewind (talk) 09:23, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Emile Geahchan
Hi, last year in an AfC you offered to look up an offline book you own, if a page was provided, the editor seem to have recently done that (pg. 24). Would be curious if this is a real person. My online searching has come up empty all point back to Wikipedia. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 08:27, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I remember this. I looked pretty hard for it. Though page 24 is not the correct page, it is on page 25 in the most weak of all references. Though I suspect the person who added it is aware that "page 24" in Hathi Trust actually goes to page 25. Here's the link to verify it. The problem is that he is not covered as an individual and its just a "signé". Problem 2, I spent over an hour combing through various places for the Order of St. Gregory the Great. Throughout the history about 18,000 people have received the honor. I do not particularly doubt the source's existence given the strange occurrence with this detailed one, but this source is all but impossible for me to get my hands on. I accessed the Vatican library to check, but aside from about 500-600 names being dug up, I got zilch. Through the actual research and other sites to catalog the papal honors, I could probably reconstruct the complete records, but next to nothing on the individual "Knight" awardee. As the third source is not about Emilee... I'd decline it. I'd say the information is truthful and their searches are not a COI or a hoax, but would not meet N/GNG. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:38, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hentai
The article Hentai you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Hentai for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemurbaby -- 14:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Neon Genesis Evangelion
The article Neon Genesis Evangelion you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemurbaby -- 14:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anime
The article Anime you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Anime for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemurbaby -- 14:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yaoi
The article Yaoi you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Yaoi for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemurbaby -- 14:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Your edit of William A. Campbell (Tuskegee Airman)
Evidently, you and I were editing the William A. Campbell article at the same time, causing an edit conflict. I added a significant amount of new content, so went ahead and saved my version. I apologize if I undid some of your edits in the process. Stevenmg (talk) 18:34, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I see no issue and my fixes were just general fixes; feel free to undo them and save your substantial work - the edit done is of lower priority. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:36, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, it looks like I saved your edited version and not mine. So, I am going back in and adding the content back. Thanks.  Stevenmg (talk) 18:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Some comments on your user page
It looks like a new user left some comments on your userpage (missing the user talk page). Just a heads up. --TeaDrinker (talk) 21:54, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah thanks! I didn't see it. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 22:23, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

RFC question
Do you think a RFC for Talk:Case Closed would be appropriate and binding? I'm considering it since there are editors who still feel unsatisfied with whatever consensus occured. DragonZero ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 02:09, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * If my history with the area has shown anything, yes, you need binding RFCs for things like this. Silly and a waste of time, but these things matter. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:17, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping and quick reply. I will request for one at some point. DragonZero  ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 02:19, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

chris

this is all so confusing. i just posted something for you but i think i did it on your "user" page, not your "talk" page which is where i should have posted it? in any event, what i wrote was that i made some additional changes to the meckler bio you were good enough to approve. i hope they are in proper wiki format. if you have time, do you mind taking a look at fixing them up if they are not. thanks, mike Mikesiris (talk) 16:07, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

chris

also, the title of the article is "alan m. meckler" but i dont think anyone would search for him with his middle intitial (and google doesnt pull it up if you dont put in the middle initial "m."  i tried to take out the middle initial in the title but couldnt figure out how to do it.  could you help out pls

thanks

mike Mikesiris (talk) 18:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC)


 * It is now at Alan Meckler anyone coming in on the links goes to the page. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, pleaseconsult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

chris,

just so I am clear, I post something on your talkpage such as I am doing now, and you reply back by posting on my talk page? thanks mike Mikesiris (talk) 13:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Moved from userpage
chris, just so that i am clear, i am communicating w you by posting on your "talk" page. when you see my post, you will reply, if you wish, and your response appears on my "talk" page? Ps. i am making some additional changes to the Meckler bio. i hope i did them properly. if you have time, do you mind taking a look and correcting them if they are not in order? thanks, mike Mikesiris (talk) 16:04, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

chris

tks for accepting my alan meckler article. now as to my question which you may have answered, communication occurs on one's own talkpage? so i should have posted this on my talkpage? but how does that assure that you will ever see it unless you are flagging my talkpage? you said you were putting your reply on my talkpage rather than "splitting " the conversation? so ideally the conversation would stay on your talkpage assuming i had posted initially a question on your talkpage? maybe i am slow but this all seems so confusing. i know i could make more contributions to wiki but it is just so damn intimidating and complicated. i have enough headaches at work and, while wiki is sometimes a nice respite, on balance i think i prefer work. however, i will try to stay active. tks again mike 24.187.74.161 (talk) 02:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * I tend to be a bit of a hardass, but clearly the community didn't agree that it was proper. And do to be fair, in re-reviewing unless its pretty clear as a boundary push, a block shouldn't be given even under topic ban circumstances. Sorry, I make bad calls every once in awhile, but that's why I swore off to not block anyone if I make admin. I'm strict and opinionated. Haha. No hard feelings, right? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hahaha. No hard feelings, of course.
 * Some administrators are too quick to use the block tool. It should only be used to prevent disruption, not as punishment. The former makes administrators people to respect, the latter people to fear.
 * I'm glad you changed your view on the block.
 * Best wishes.-- MarshalN20 | T al k 02:20, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

The Park Mumbai
Hi, Suggested changes have been made for the article The Park Mumbai so that it can be easily understood by anyone who reads it. Link to the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sanjeevchandrav/The_Park_Mumbai

Thanks, Sanjeev Chandra V — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjeevchandrav (talk • contribs) 06:28, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Forced Entertainment
Hi. Sorry to email you directly, I'm doing so because you've just made some worthwhile structural changes to Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Forced_Entertainment. I'm trying to get this prospective article reviewed for submission. I believe I have shown ample notability but user Ryulong doesn't agree and has denied the submission. It is my impression that he is doing so unfairly, this prospective article demonstrates far more notability than many articles I have seen pass the 'articles for deletion because of lack of notability' process and this user appears to be standing in its way as the submission appears to rest with him and I don't know how to seek input from other editors. You can see Ryulong's response on his talk page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ryulong#Forced_Entertainment, which seems to be unnecessarily overtly damning. Do you think my article is a valid submission? And if so can you please help? Thanks -Lopifalko (talk) 08:05, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * It is perfectly okay. I am trying to help, but I have to ask the person who "salted" the article before it can be passed. Whatever Ryulong says or did in the past is unrelated to what it is now and the fact that a Google check shows notability. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Dear Chris, I'm sorry I m not used to Wikipedia, I just wanted to place an article on my greatgrandfather in English language. An (bigger) article in dutch is already accepted on Wiki, this article turned down by you is only an translation and smaller version of the dutch article. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pellens Manfred GrL (talk) 05:40, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * See below. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 12:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Source
Dear Chris, I'm sorry I m not used to Wikipedia, I just wanted to place an article on my greatgrandfather in English language. An (bigger) article in dutch is already accepted on Wiki, this article turned down by you is only an translation and smaller version of the dutch article. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pellens Manfred GrL (talk) 05:41, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * If there are no sources on the article, I cannot pass it. Basically, Wikipedia needs reliable sources that back up your claim so that it is verifiable. As it stands, there are no sources cited and that is why I declined it at this time. If you add some sources and resubmit it may pass. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 12:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Review my article at Articles for creation/BIIT
I submitted the page with the name BIIT. I want wikipedia memebers to review it and publish it for me. Please review it and let me know in case if it is acceptable or if it has any issue in it.Sidra456 (talk) 06:54, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * As it is part of the "University of Arid Agriculture" I would decline it with only the google map and official website link. Because it doesn't meet the notability guidelines. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 12:40, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Elsa Cladera de Bravo
Hi, I have tried many times to have my submission Elsa Cladera de Bravo accepted as an article. Your main argumentation is that it's a blank submission. The last step I have taken is to mark: Show hidden categories in user preferences. I hope this can help. Nadezhda Bravo Cladera (talk) 19:49, 21 November 2013 (UTC).

list of characters for Teen Titans Go!
Hello, ChrisGualtieri -- I have been working for the past several months to create an article entitled "List of Teen Titans Go! Characters" in order to avoid what I felt was the unnecessary overlap of contributions between that and the "List of Teen Titans Characters" page; though the shows are related, they most certainly are not one and the same and thus do not need to have overt submissions in regards to both programs. I submitted what I felt was a strong article back in early October, but, as I'm sure you already know, it was not approved due to "all primary sources to the media." Understanding the sources were indeed too centrally sourced, five new alternate sources were recently added to the "External Links" section of the article; unfortunately, the article you again deemed unworthy for approval, claiming that all sources were still primary. Now at a loss of understanding the problem, I feel I need to ask directly, what precisely constitutes a "secondary source" in your opinion? Especially in light of the reality that all pertinent details of the article can only come from a primary source.

Again, while not different from its predecessor, the new show is also not the same as its predecessor either, and as such, likely deserves no attachment to the aforementioned article from the previous program. I would like to address your concern in the hopes that the article may be approved, a concern I am not yet seeing or understanding, so feel free to respond accordingly so that I may do what is necessary to have this matter reach a satisfactory conclusion for all involved parties.

Thank you for your time.

RedStillRumblesNC-17 (talk) 20:11, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I have passed it. Just don't let it get deleted. While it doesn't need to meet the same bar for N. I rather not get dragged into a conflict with A&M. Unlikely as that project doesn't see this as "anime". ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, good; thank you. I plan to continue to improve the article, starting immediately following this reply. I am glad we were able to reach a conciliatory end to this matter, and again, I thank you for your time.


 * RedStillRumblesNC-17 (talk) 14:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Yadkin River Bridges
Please take a look at what I did and see if that makes you happy.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 20:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Neon Genesis Evangelion
The article Neon Genesis Evangelion you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemurbaby -- 14:32, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Time for the next! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:59, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=580704745 your edit] to Hadrien Laroche may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:08, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Flammarion, 2009) —which have placed him at the forefront of contemporary French writing [http://www.dailymotion.

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=580922539 your edit] to Etel Solingen may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In an article-length review essay published in the journal International Security, William Potter of the Monterey Institute and Gaukhar Mukhatzhanova described the book as, "[http://

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=581985727 your edit] to List of Harlequin Romance novels may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:38, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * | # 2630 || | Ann Cooper|Maelstrom  || Ann Cooper || July 1984

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=581985794 your edit] to List of Harlequin Romance novels may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:38, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * | # 2630 || | Ann Cooper|Maelstrom  || Ann Cooper || July 1984

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=582912404 your edit] to Malcolm Gladwell may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * web |accessdate = January 17, 2009 |url = http://www.wnyc.org/shows/radiolab/episodes/2008/11/28/ Radiolab |title = Race |work = Radiolab |date = November 28, 2008 }} In the spring of 1982,

Nausicaä, dates etc
Hi ChrisGualtieri, First of all thank you for posting a welcome message, and warning me about my improper behaviour, on my talk page when I was still using an IP. I saw that you also recently installed a script to make date styles consistent throughout Wikipedia articles and was wondering if there would be objections if such a script was run on all the various articles related to Miyazaki's Nausicaä. Right now I'm trying to figure out how to unify dates but also links and citations in the manga article but I think there is a benefit to unifying them for all the Nausicaä related articles with a common root - in order to facilitate sharing links and citations without (re-)introducing different date and citation styles between the individual articles as they are all further developed. Some of the articles currently generate errors. (Because of some aberrant formatting in dating styles and because of outdated parameters in the citation templates). I think they can be cleaned up and prevented from reoccurring/re-introduced when new content is added or shared between related articles. Based on your improvements of the film article and its successful nomination for GA, I'm dropping in to ask your preferences for the date style in that film article. Would there be an objection to dates formulated as "January 1, 1111" throughout the entire article? I'd also like your feedback on the progression of the other articles. At the moment I'm more or less treading water, as I have been in the preceding year, revising links and spelling out some detail in the timeline of the manga's creation. Something that can hopefully be condensed -without significant loss of information- through re-writes of the prose in the near future. Verso.Sciolto (talk) 05:36, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. The manga's dates were already unified so I made the film compliant. This is actually something that needs to be done for FA level; so it was best fixed now. Thanks for pointing it out. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:42, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Is it ok to do the Nausicaä (character) and Nausicaä Character List articles as well? They also have the same root but the individual articles themselves have different styles. Curious particularly about Nausicaä (character) - that split was done by Malkinann who uses dmy and the rules about how far to go back to ascertain the proper format for each individual article aren't clear to me where splits are concerned. I can leave a message for Malkinann but that editor hasn't edited Wikipedia since 2012. Would it be proper to ask on the articles talk page and wait a while for feedback? If so how long should that request be left before the dates are edited there? Verso.Sciolto (talk) 06:04, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll do those tomorrow. Generally, we want to keep things simple, but if one page is radically different than exceptions exist. Closely related pages should ideally be written in the same manner unless WP:TIES or something else gets in there way. I really don't think anyone cares about it that much in the first place. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:14, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've changed the dates for those and added a comment on the article talk pages. Related note, for some reason the change of all the dates didn't resolve all of the date related template / parameter errors. Verso.Sciolto (talk) 06:49, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Dragon Ball merge
There is no deadline for these things, particularly when you made demands that the merges be put on hold because of the RFC that hasn't done anything in a while (as far as I can tell). I've restored the templates.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:04, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * They've been up for over a month without any active discussion and both the RFC and the discussion were clear. I'll ask for it be closed at AN. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:06, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * There's no deadline and all active discussion has been stagnated by the RFC. You don't have to request that it be closed just for the sake of closing it.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:12, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No. I'm requesting its closure - the consensus is clear, but you reject it. I'm here to build an encyclopedia and arguing with you for six months has been a colossal waste of my time. When you want to work together - tell me - because the only thing you've done is to impede progress and drive away good contributions by opposing content required to meet both the GA and FA criteria. It is like you want to go to Arb Com and you know that I don't want you banned, blocked or whatever, but your actions are putting me in a tough place. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You can't demand that it be closed when everything's been shut down by the RFC. Why do you even demand this level of bureaucracy anyway?—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:46, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The consensus at BOTH places were clear on the matter and the continuing "metrics" is not going to come up with any marker, but the black and white line you championed has been resoundingly rejected. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:58, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * There was never a "black and white line" I wanted. I am actively arguing against metrics to go with. I just do not think that the splits that had been performed on several articles were suitable.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:19, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Knockout (violent game)
A serious question concerning all this edit warring bullshit. Do I actually have to restore an older version of the article that I did not have any hand in editing and remove any and all beneficial changes I made to the article for it to be considered a self revert because I think my near doubling of the article's size when my reverts were removing content should be enough. Also how come you always stop editing these pages when AN3 gets used?—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:55, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Consensus for whether List of Nintendo 3DS games should be split into 2 pages
Hello, you're invited to vote and express your views about this on the discussion topic. Jotamide Jotamide (talk) 03:50, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Anime and Manga RfC - Update, request for closure. Thank you. Hasteur (talk) 15:04, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, pleaseconsult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)