User talk:Cirt/Archive 20

Thank you
Hi Cirt,

Thanks for the barnstar, and for your interest in the articles I have been working on as well. I have appreciated our interactions and hope that we will connect over more articles in the future.

Happy editing,

Neelix (talk) 00:24, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, and agreed! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Religion in The Simpsons
Template:Religion in The Simpsons has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. p b  p  17:12, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, but I'll respectfully defer to the outcome of the discussion as determined by community consensus. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:53, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion notice
You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people) so I thought you might want to comment at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:20, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Recreation of Dan Stec
Back in 2010, Dan Stec was deleted as a result of an WP:AfD (see Articles for deletion/Dan Stec). Fast forward three years and the article's subject has been elected to the New York State Assembly, where his is one of the few WP:REDLINKs to be filled in. Given that the subject of the article now meets WP:POLITICIAN criterion #1, would you restore it? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 15:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll respectfully defer to admins about what to do about that. Suggest you post with a request to WP:AN. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:20, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Heart of a Woman FAC
Hi Cirt, thanks for your review of this article. Wanted you to know that I've completed addressing your comments. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:07, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Freedom of speech = New WikiProject
I've recently gone ahead and created WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do: Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:36, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech
 * 1) List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech.
 * 2) Add userbox User Freedom of speech to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
 * 3) Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using WikiProject Freedom of speech.
 * 4) Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
 * 5) Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Portal:Technology selected articles
Hey there. I'm still spending most of my time on Wikidata and doing RL work (Wikidata is in a... how do I describe it... critical transition period), but I finally got around to finding some older technology FAs for you, to try to even out the timing.


 * There are some train and bridge articles in Category:FA-Class_rail_transport_articles, including Niagara Falls Suspension Bridge, Hellingly Hospital Railway, SECR K and SR K1 classes or SECR N class, and Kinzua Bridge
 * The Turk (a fun one)
 * There are a ton of battleships at WikiProject Military history/Operation Majestic Titan/Showcase, and picking one like Minas Geraes-class battleship or Brazilian battleship São Paulo will give you something from South America, which isn't really represented in the current selection yet.
 * Gas tungsten arc welding
 * Winter service vehicle
 * Architecture of the Song Dynasty and Architecture of the medieval cathedrals of England have some technological aspects, it depends on how you compose the text in the portal
 * Gunpowder artillery in the Middle Ages

I should, theoretically, have a few days at the beginning of March and a few days at the end of April, if we're still working on this then. Other than that, I'm really tied up until May. Sorry.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  02:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * These are really great suggestions, I'll get to adding some of them. Thank you! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

List Peer Review for Dan Savage bibliography
Please see discussion, at Peer review/Dan Savage bibliography/archive2. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:10, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Dan Savage bibliography
 * List Peer Review for Dan Savage bibliography

Portal work
Hi there,

Thanks for the review on Insurrection btw, I noticed that you've done a great deal of portal work and one of the things I'm hoping to do is improved Portal:Star Trek to featured status. However, I've never done any portal based-work before, and right now I'm concentrating on getting the number of DYK hooks up to 50 (for ten sets of five) and then the next step will be to overhaul the selected articles as they're pretty random right now as the vast majority of the Good Articles in the project are mine and have only been created in the last six months or so.

Once I get properly started on the re-design (which I'm going to aim to do as a mock up in userspace rather than risk breaking the existing templates!), is it OK if I occasionally bug you with portal related questions? My immediate thoughts for layout is to completely drop recommended articles, move the WikiProjects to a wider box down by related portals, and then try to balance the size of the other sections so that they don't just mess up the layout quite so much (right now on my screen at least, there is a big gap about halfway down on the left side created by the size of the sections on the right side). I was thinking that Portal:The Simpsons was probably a good example of what to base the layout on, taking into account the size of each box etc as the ones on the ST portal seem to be rather large right now. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated! :) Miyagawa (talk) 09:14, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That would be amazing if you could do that. I'd effectively be putting it together through trial and error and so I'd be much happier with someone who knows what they're doing taking the lead! :) Miyagawa (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

English Wikipedia readership survey 2013
Hi. I was wondering if you have any thoughts about English Wikipedia readership survey 2013. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice, will try and find some time to look it over. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

FAC
Hi. I've put up Ra.One for an FAC, but it's seen little activity for some time. Could you take a look at it, and put up your thoughts? I'd like to get working on the article once more. Thanks. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:40, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Portal
Long story short, for the moment, I don't have enough time to do multiple focuses without a little help. Would you, by any chance, be willing to help out with a DYK section? Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't really do those anymore, though I do work on expansions and quality improvement projects. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, heh, a DYK section for the portal. Sure, I can set one up for others to then fill out additional entries, no problem. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks! I'm a little intimidated with finding the DYKs, since it's such a big topic that it's hard to know what to search for. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:09, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

New article: Urofsky v. Gilmore
I've created the new article, Urofsky v. Gilmore. Suggestions for additional secondary sources would be appreciated, at the article's talk page, Talk:Urofsky v. Gilmore. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Urofsky v. Gilmore

Congratulations!
Congrats on getting Freedom for the Thought we Hate to pass at FAC. I was holding off on my commenting until you'd dealt with everyone else's; guess I waited too long, though I think it's a solid article. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:44, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Note to self: Freedom of speech page, Censorship and Liberty templates
Templates used at article, Freedom of speech, to convert to footer templates using Navbox. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:48, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Censorship
 * 2) Liberty

Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Update on status of footer template
 * 1) I posted a notice about this proposal to convert to a footer template that goes at the bottom of articles, using Navbox.
 * 2) I cross-posted the same notice to the talk pages for Liberty and Censorship.
 * 3) I waited over one week, and received one response in support of this proposal.
 * 4) Therefore, this has now been ✅.
 * 5) I also took the liberty of going ahead and moving the newly converted template to the bottom of pages in the article-main-space where it was being used.

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Singapore
Hi Cirt,

Sorry for the late reply. I have made some changes to the portal since your last reminder, but the reviewer hasnt gotten back to me yet. Would appreciate it if you can help. Thanks.--Lionratz (talk) 06:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Defense Distributed STL's on commons
Hi! Thank you for contribution to russian wiki's ru:Defense Distributed. What do you think about possibility of uploading Defense Distributed's STL models to Commons? All files are GPLv3 according to github.com/maduce/defcad-repo `a5b (talk) 00:38, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

For your consideration


Hello Cirt. As a representative for the Video Game project, I am here with this wall to place around you. The reason is you have been asking about why games like Final Fantasy or The Legend of Zelda are not at WP:FA. So as such we have decided to put a wall here to make sure you stop asking. If you'll like this wall taken down, please make a Micropayment on 1.99 US dollars for each brick taken down. With this money it will help us make DLC for our articles that need improvement. Thank you and have a good day. GamerPro64 15:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know what DLC is but I hope this was a joke. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, DLC must be Downloadable content, erm, okay. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:15, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. Sorry if you didn't get the joke. I added in micropayments and DLC since they are controversial issues in gaming right now. Just wanted to make it because of you wanting to see certain game articles becoming Featured Articles in the future and wanted to add humor to it all. GamerPro64  16:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see, I didn't even follow or know those were controversial issues going on right now, heh. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:03, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

RFC on TFA images
Dear Cirt, you may be interested in a discussion that I've started at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article. All views welcome. BencherliteTalk 16:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Free Speech, "The People's Darling Privilege"
Hi Cirt, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, and to correct of revert my edits if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:22, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries; my first thoughts are that the reception section is given undue weight for an article of this size. There's a chance I can reduce this through copy-editing but I haven't reviewed that section yet so I'll see when I get there. In "Author", I find the sentence; "In 2004, Curtis was the Judge Donald L. Smith Professor of Public and Constitutional Law at Wake Forest University.[5]". Is this a scholarship, an honourary title or an award of some kind? Neither the title or Judge Donald L. Smith have articles here. How is this important in the context of the subject of the article? Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think the Reception section is "undue weight", but if you could trim the overall size down, without removing any sources, that'd be appreciated. That's the name of his professorship chair, I don't know how notable it is, but it could just be copyedited to say he is a professor of constitutional law there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:19, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries; thanks for relying. I'll try not to remove any sources; if I think it's necessary to remove any completely I'll put them on the article's talk page. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:30, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds good, so long as all sources are retained, I always give lots of wide leeway to copyeditors. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that Cirt; copy-edit done; feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 11:38, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nicely done, thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:14, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

GA
Now a copyeditor appeared, can you take another look at the Evil Dead review? igordebraga ≠ 17:19, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

BLT cocktail

 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I was just about the give you one too. Looks like Northamerica has beat me to it. Good work on the BLT cocktail! Michaelzeng7 (talk) 23:48, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Per your message on my talk page about photographing a BLT cocktail, if I find one and have a camera on-hand, then sure, this could be uploaded to Commons. Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 02:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Cœur de pirate discography FLC
Hello. The Cœur de pirate discography is currently at FLC. I have worked extensively on it and hope that you can leave some comments to help it reach Featured List status. Thanks! :) – Underneath-it-All (talk) 01:06, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, I'll see if I can have a look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:31, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Upcoming GA Reviews
I will review these two articles for WP:GAN consideration. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:46, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Elizabeth David
 * 2) Dalhousie University
 * Update: Elizabeth David GA Review on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:39, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Passed Elizabeth David as WP:GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:20, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

SheiKra FAC
Its been two weeks so you know what time it is! I've re-nominated the SheiKra article for FA status so you can now leave your opinion(s) here. If you can't get to reviewing it, no worries! :) -- Dom497 ( talk ) 02:52, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks for the notice, got a bit on my to-do list but I'll see about trying to make some time. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No rush and if you can't get to it, no hard feelings. :) -- Dom497 ( talk ) 03:00, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Freedom of Expression (McLeod book)
Hi Cirt, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, and to correct of revert my edits if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Done - feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:29, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

bad link on fly lady's Wikipedia page
wickipedia - fly lady

after area titled "methodology" and before "references is the area "see also". there is one item, a link - Big Tent. this link takes one to a deleted page. the link should be removed.

(sorry if I am barking up the wrong tree. i don't have time right now to fully investigate the correct route to take. i'm just letting you know about the above.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twistedprincess69 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Northamerica1000(talk) 04:57, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality improvement drive for Portal:Star Trek
Per agreement from after a request, I'm beginning the reformatting process as part of a quality improvement drive for Portal:Star Trek. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:43, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Re: selected articles, that shouldn't be a problem. How many is a good number to include? Miyagawa (talk) 20:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Great, I'll get that sorted over the weekend. Miyagawa (talk) 21:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Lady Gaga: Queen of Pop
Hi Cirt, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, and to correct of revert my edits if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:14, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:18, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries; I'm done. Feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles: Recruitment Center (Update #1)
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notice, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Vaca tion  9  00:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll check it out. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

FYI
Talk:BLT cocktail/GA1.--Dwaipayan (talk) 00:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, I'll respond there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, yes I will be back in the GA page in 2 days. Sorry for the delay, regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Elizabeth David
Thank you for your swift second review and very nice note on my talk page. You are, if you will allow me to say it, a rigorous reviewer (which is as it should be) whom nothing escapes. I am at your service if I can be of use in reviewing any of your articles in the future. Tim riley (talk) 16:56, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Afterthought: I suppose I am honour bound to do a GA review myself now. I've done a few, but I hope I can do my next one anything like as well as you do them! Tim riley (talk) 17:21, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Name your page and I'll gladly informally PR it. Tim riley (talk) 17:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have just read Everything Tastes Better with Bacon, during which I was provoked to eat three of the fingers of my own left hand in a feeding frenzy. I shall look at the article again tomorrow, and report back. This is so enjoyable! Tim riley (talk) 19:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything that needs changing. A second PR would, I'm pretty sure, be a waste of time. I'd go straight to FAC. Is it of interest that the book was mentioned in one of our leading British papers, The Independent only two months ago? here – so its fame has spread this far. BTW, looking at the Perry article I see what you mean about portals and will certainly follow suit. Tim riley (talk) 09:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

NYT Book Reviews
Not sure, but I'm free all day tomorrow, and I'll toddle round the corner to the British Library and see. BL readers have access to the main NYT archive, but whether that includes the Book Reviews I'll find out and report back. I'll check the English Times Literary Supplement while I'm there and anything else that looks promising. More tomorrow. Tim riley (talk) 18:54, 29 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I've got database access. It's a short review.  Here's a transcription:

"EVERYTHING TASTES BETTER WITH BACON: 70 Recipes for Every Meal of the Day (Chronicle, paper, $18.95), by Sara Perry. Perry's dessert recipes aside (peanut butter cookies with bacon brittle, anyone?), I have the sneaking feeling that both the professional and the nonprofessional joie de vivrists out there can agree on Perry's thesis -- she's onto something."

--some jerk on the Internet   (talk)  19:17, 29 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The article is accessible for all without subscription (who did not exhausted their monthly quota). Just check []. OsmanRF34 (talk) 22:49, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:54, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon - FA nomination
Everything Tastes Better with Bacon is currently a candidate for consideration for a 2nd time for Featured Article quality status.
 * Everything Tastes Better with Bacon

The discussion page is at Featured article candidates/Everything Tastes Better with Bacon/archive2.

Thank you for your time, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Request for Your Help
Hi Cirt: I am told to reach out to you about this matter for hopefully you can spare some time to help.

I would like to invite you to come to the Erica Andrews article to give your thoughts and wisdom to what has gone on. I was one of the main editors of the article. I researched a lot about Andrews' life and career and placed most of the information on the page. One day in comes Qworty, Little Green Rosetta and Coffeepusher. To cut a long story short, it became very ugly between me and them as Qworty, Little Green Rosetta were deleting information out of the article. They would claim there citation source was weak and even when I would prove to them that the information was factual through sources, it was never enough. The article became a hot battleground for them and me. It got ugly. Very ugly. I stepped away for a while as I really have no desire to fight on Wikipedia with anyone. Then I was very surprised to see Qworty being exposed for what he did and got banned. Shortly after that Little Green Rosetta got banned. So as part of Project Qworty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Qworty_clean-up), I returned to the Andrews article and replaced the information that they had deleted. However, now I'm running into yet the same arguments with Coffeepusher and Howicus. So I would really like to invite you to review my edits and what they've reverted back to. My edits: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Erica_Andrews&oldid=557673661.

The Andrews talk page contains my comments on my replacement of content per Project Qworty. They have claimed the content I have placed back is contentious. I have asked just what part of actual career achievements is contentious? Andrews really did win her titles, really did act in 2 movies, really did perform on stage, really did appear in music videos, and really did host shows and performed. Nothing I have placed there is malicious lies. I have not made up anything to libel or slander or create some illusive persona about Andrews. I seek to place facts on her page so that fans or any reader can read about her. I have no agenda beyond wanting to share information that I have researched on and ensure that an article I have worked on gets to convey truth. I will agree that sometimes the source material is not from a mainstream outlet like NY Times, Washington Post but it does not mean the information is erroneous or is contentious or are lies to libel Andrews. I would NEVER do that to anyone living or dead. The information has weight and carries value for a reader who is seeking to learn more about Andrews in her bio. I hope you can chime in and make some sense. Every time I asked for reasons why factual information cannot be placed on a page, I get lots of round robin bs answers given to me. I then ask why other entertainers get a full listing of their achievements (filmography/discography) without a need for a mile of citations as I am requested to do so. Take a look at the articles on Robert Wagner, Stefanie Powers, Cher. Those entertainers are very much alive (BLP) and their pages detail out their career achievements. Yet when I try to do the same with Andrews, it is disallowed. Why does the Andrews article have a completely different standard? Is it because she is LGBT and therefore not allowed the same equality? Thank you for your help. Lightspeedx (talk) 06:06, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Just a quick FYI, Lightspeedx is currently Canvassing, , , , , , because their previous Forumshopping didn't give them the results they desired. Dispute resolution page, Talk:Varifiability page, Talk:Videos page, Requests for mediation/Erica Andrews. Cheers! Coffeepusher (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * BTW, Cirt, Coffeepusher does not know who Erica Andrews is. Has no interest in her career, doesn't know anything about her work or career or even life but all of a sudden, he's now her article keeper. If you do not find this weird, you should. I have already called him out on this. I suspect he's a transphobic or homophobic person who for some reason really needs to use the Andrews article as a platform for his agenda or phobia. He's obsessed with following me around - which I must say is rather amusing since he obviously feels I'm that important for him to obsess about. But really, why this obsession with an entertainer he doesn't even know, doesn't care about, never seen her in performance and really doesn't even know what she has done. Also, Coffeepusher hung out with Qworty and Little Green Rosetta, both are banned users now. He agreed with Qworty a lot. Lightspeedx (talk) 02:14, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Coffeepusher, seriously dude, chill. Take a big chill pill and really re-examine why you are so obsessed with following me around and pushing your edits and agenda around regarding the Andrews article. For me, at least I have reasons - I am a fan of Andrews and I did work on researching for content on her and would like to see that her article has some integrity. You don't know Andrews, you don't really give a dang about Andrews and you are not in the least interested in her career. What's it to you about this whole thing? If it's a pissing contest you want me to partake in, I'm not interested. I really am not. You really have no need or reason to keep shadowing me. What's it to you if the Andrews article is shredded to bits or if it wins Featured Article status? Really. Go find something in your life to fill your time with. It's not worth you daily obsessing and jumping up and down trailing me around trying to diminish my reputation. Despite what you think, I'm not worth your time and I really don't care about you or what you think of me. Your obsession is not healthy. If you are transphobic or homophobic and really want to see to that the Andrews article gets beat up, then come on out about that. Please stop the nonsense. OK? Lightspeedx (talk) 02:14, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

RE: Talk:Dalhousie University/GA1
I responded to the concerns which you brought up in the GAN. Anyhow, thank you for taking the time to review the article, it's greatly appreciated! Leventio (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply. Anywho, RE to the GAN Leventio (talk) 12:22, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you again for taking the time to reviewing the article. Have a good one! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leventio (talk • contribs)
 * You're most welcome! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Neville Page
I'll read through it tonight, see whether it's straightforward enough. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Does this interest you at all?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/English_Wikipedia_readership_survey_2013 --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 02:53, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks interesting, I'll take a look at it soon, thanks for the notice, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:07, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

 * Responded there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Work (song)
Hello, I noticed you protected this redirect. Could you point the redirect to Work? Thank you.-- Laun  chba  ller  16:55, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no longer an admin, you'll have to ask a sysop or at WP:RFP. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:20, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

 * Thanks for the notice, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:17, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

re Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Singapore
Hi again,

The reviewer does not seem to be responding to my message. How can I make further progress on the nominations?--Lionratz (talk) 02:18, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Bacon fac
Sure, go ahead  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:16, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for help with Peer Review
Hey Cirt, I appreciated your comments on the Peer review for List of Detroit Red Wings draft picks. I have just made a peer review request for List of Detroit Red Wings seasons, if you could review that page as well and offer your input it would also be greatly apprecitated. Thanks again. Cheers, Rejectwater (talk) 20:12, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll try to take a look at it sometime soon, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I wanted to help you out in return and saw you have a peer review open for Fuck (film). I reviewed the article and found I have nothing constructive to add to the conversation.  I don't understand why it isn't FA already.  Keep up the good work.  Cheers, Rejectwater (talk) 10:41, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks very much for the kind words about my Fuck (film) quality improvement project! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:32, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

BLT cocktail
Hi! Yes, I assessed the article met the criteria. Updated the talk page.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

 * Thanks for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:49, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Featured articles
Hi Cirt,

Thanks for reviewing 2012 tour of She Has a Name and for the congratulations on its promotion to featured status. It was good to see Freedom for the Thought That We Hate featured as well. I look forward to seeing both up on the main page someday.

Neelix (talk) 02:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome
It's nice to get a note like yours. Yes, I'm doing well. Daniel Case (talk) 05:06, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Fuck peer review

 * 1) Fuck (film)
 * 2) Peer review/Fuck (film)/archive1

I've listed the article Fuck (film) for peer review.

Help with furthering along the quality improvement process would be appreciated, at Peer review/Fuck (film)/archive1.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Created new article Steve Anderson (director)
I've created a new article on the film director, Steve Anderson (director).
 * Steve Anderson (director)

Suggestions for additional secondary sources would be welcomed, at Talk:Steve Anderson (director). &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:18, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for Everything Tastes Better with Bacon

 * Thank you! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Chris Field (Los Angeles musician)
Hi Cirt. Somebody associated with Chris Field (Los Angeles musician) contacted me and said they were unhappy that this page, which appears high in Google for the subject's name, is templated for advertising. I'm not neutral in the matter and don't want to touch the article other than non-controversial edits such as grammar and formatting. I know you are a prolific editor and that while we sometimes agree, we also sometimes disagree. Not looking for any specific result here other than for you to take a look and see if you can fix it somehow, whether through editing, deleting, or other appropriate action as you see fit. Thank you. Jehochman Talk 18:34, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for thinking of me!


 * It does seem like the article could be a bit more NPOV, however when writing in order to satisfy notability standards, that sometimes happens so it's understandable.


 * Probably the best thing would be to research WP:RS and WP:V secondary sources, and just go ahead and rewrite the entire article from scratch.


 * What do you think of that approach? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:26, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. I've informed the artist's management that it would be best practice for them to be hands off (except for vandalism correction and similar non-controversial edits). Jehochman Talk 00:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * My only concern is that this is a biography of a living person, and after my restrictions were handed down from the Arbitration Committee, I've avoided any sort of controversy in that area. I'm afraid of coming anywhere close to those restrictions. Lately I've tried my best to focus on quality improvement projects generally related to the topic of freedom of speech, which have led in multiple cases to successful WP:GA and WP:FA quality improvement drives. I fear the potential for sanctions if I violate those restrictions. I'm scared of editing in areas remotely related to those restrictions, and I've kept editing BLPs to a minimum and generally only in cases that were relevant to GA and FA quality improvement drives on other articles I've been working on improving. Jehochman, you're more experienced with Arbitration Cases than I, and more familiar with the dealings of the Arbitration Committee than I am &mdash; perhaps you could look over my Arbitration restrictions, and with respect to this particular article, just double-check for me that it's okay for me to edit this article with the goal of attempting to improve its quality, without fear of potential for further sanctions? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:28, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I would say baconerrific, but I don't want to give myself an aneurysm

 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:12, 11 June 2013 (UTC)


 * OK, how is a bacon article ever a "lighter note"? Congrats Cirt! Drmies (talk) 05:31, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It was a fun quality improvement project! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:34, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Created new article: Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties
I've gone ahead and created a new article for the book, Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties.
 * Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties

Collaboration and particularly suggestions for additional secondary sources would be appreciated at the article's talk page, Talk:Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

TFAR
Thanks. It would have been a more difficult discussion and decision if the article was a brand-new FA with no concerns about article quality... Thanks also for your message about TFAR nominations. I agree that the rules are complicated, at first sight, but they are logical and get easier with practice! They have grown up over time as a way of helping balance, through a points system, the important factors for TFA choices (in no particular order: diversity of subject matter, inherent importance of the subject, date relevance, and bonuses for new FA writers and FAs that have been "waiting their turn" for a long time). At least we can get the rules into a few paragraphs, unlike DYK! Various discussions have been had in the last year or so about the system, but no alternatives have found consensus. If you can think of ways of improving the way TFAR does things, I'm all ears - especially if it helps make my life easier! Best wishes, BencherliteTalk 07:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally, bacon appears to be an underrepresented main page topic (!) - do you have any particular date in mind for your latest FA? BencherliteTalk 08:30, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * How about 31 August 2013 = International Bacon Day???


 * That's be really neat. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

;)
Somehow you know my favourite word ;) Curly Turkey (gobble) 08:56, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Heh, thanks. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

My barnstar
Thank you very much, that's very kind of you - and I think you're the first person (in the 51⁄2 years that I've had the mop) to give me that particular barnstar, so perhaps this means I've finally done something right as an admin! Kind regards and best wishes, BencherliteTalk 00:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * My pleasure, you deserve it, I know it's not always easy mopping. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:19, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Portland "Wiknic" 2013!
Hope you are able to attend! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:38, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice but I'll be busy out of town visiting friends. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Gather Together FAC
Hi Cirt, hope your summer is going well. Since you reviewed The Heart of a Woman, I thought you might be interested in the fact that I currently have another one up for FAC, but it's dangerously close to failing due to lack of support. Would you mind going over there and taking a look. I appreciate it. Let me know how I can assist you in your current projects here. Thanks. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:06, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay I'll take a look at the article soon and see if I can leave some comments. As far as assisting me in my current projects here, I generally post notices to relevant WikiProject talkpages, and as well to my own user talk page, with updates on my quality-improvement-drives and stages of discussion for those articles where participation is appreciated. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:30, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Media and drama, two articles for pending GA Review
Media and drama, two articles for pending GA Review: I will review these articles for GA candidacy. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Peter Chao
 * 2) Christopher Nolan
 * Update: Christopher Nolan quick failed. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:50, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Peter Chao placed on GA Review on Hold status. Will have to revisit that one in a bit. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 09:14, 13 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Peter Chao done. ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 05:32, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, will revisit soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:22, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Passed Peter Chao as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Wordless novel GA
Hey! Thanks a lot for doing the GA review for Wordless novel. I just wanted to ask why you "recommend replacing or removing File:CABINET DES DR CALIGARI 01.jpg"? I'd hate to replace it with something that has the same problem that drove you to recommend replacing it in the first place. Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:11, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh! I thought there was an issue with the image itself.  I think I understand the copyright situation, though—it's the same as for the lead image: as long as it's on the English Wikipedia servers (which are in the US), it's fine (because the US copyright has unambiguously expired), but it can't be transferred to Commons until it's non-US copyrights have expired (which may or may not be the case with Dr. Caligari).  Of course, a better image would be nice either way, if one were suggested.  Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:33, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Peer review response
Cirt-

I believe I have addressed your concerns as posted at Peer review/List of Detroit Red Wings seasons/archive1. I look forward to any additional input you may have. Thank you again for taking the time. Regards, Rejectwater (talk) 11:55, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:28, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Language and literature, two articles for review
These two were found listed in the Language and literature section at WP:GAN: I will review these articles for GA candidacy. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:27, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Street Gang
 * 2) The Oath of the Vayuputras
 * Passed The Oath of the Vayuputras as GA quality, next up to review is Street Gang. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 09:13, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Street Gang marked as GA on Hold, will check back later. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:19, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Speaking of Street GAng, here's the mail! Loved the pun, didn't think of it myself, but it's very clever. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: I've completed addressing your comments; would you mind going over and taking a look? I also finished addressing your comments at the FAC you reviewed for me; same request?  Thanks for your assistance; it's muchly appreciated.  Let me know what I can do for you! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:22, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Passed Street Gang as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:00, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon
Congrats on the FA! Thanks for putting another trophy on WikiProject Oregon's mantle. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It was fun! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:22, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

FAC review?
Hi, if you have some spare time, would you care to review God of War: Betrayal? It's very close to being promoted, I just need a review or two from a non-expert, as in, someone outside of the WP video game project. -- JDC808  ♫  16:57, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Quite busy with other quality improvement projects and GA Reviews, but I'll see if I can get to it later. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:00, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No need now, the article was promoted. Thanks anyways. I'm about to nominate God of War II though if you would care to review it. -- JDC808  ♫  03:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Same reply, sigh, I'll try, but might not comply, why why, just I. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:23, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. -- JDC808  ♫  03:54, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

God of War II FAC
Responded to all points. Question, why do you not like comments interspersed throughout? -- JDC808  ♫  05:21, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

FAC
Hello!, I thought to inform you about my article which is at the fac. It would be great, if you could look at it once and share your comments. Featured article candidates/Priyanka Chopra/archive2. Thank You.— Prashant 06:26, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, not this time, I see it already has lots of user participation. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:32, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality improvement project for Chris Field (Los Angeles musician)
I've rewritten the article Chris Field (Los Angeles musician), DIFF.
 * Chris Field (Los Angeles musician)

Further suggestions for additional secondary sources would be most appreciated, at the article's talk page, at Talk:Chris Field (Los Angeles musician).

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Your assistance please
You closed the 2nd afd on Abd al Malik Abd al Wahab. He is in the news again.

I'd like to re-examine the article, to see how much coverage al Wahab merits, given this new news coverage. Maybe notable details from the deleted article merit inclusion into a new article on the 48 individuals who were on the previously secret list of ‘indefinite detainees’? The Obama administration's attempts to keep this list secret stirred a lot of controversy.

Recently, when afds concluded specific Guantanamo captives didn't merit separate articles about them they have been closed as redirect and merge to the articles on Guantanamo captives to that nation -- with the original contribution history and talk page available for review.

In Al Wahab's case that would be Yemeni detainees at Guantanamo Bay. I request you restore the original contribution history and talk page for Abd al Malik Abd al Wahab, and turn it into another redirect to Yemeni detainees at Guantanamo Bay. If you are concerned someone will change the redirect back to an article, ignoring the closure, you could lock it so only administrators could edit it.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 15:51, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not an admin anymore, I suggest you post about this issue to talk pages of relevant WikiProjects, and/or seek out some other admin, and/or post a request to WP:AN, and/or file a request for reconsideration at WP:DRV. Good luck to you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:45, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Fuck
Hey Cirt, I know you're heavily involved in editing freedom of speech articles, and I wanted to bounce some ideas for fuck off of you. I want to cut a lot of the stuff in the Modern usage and Censorship sections because it's mostly just a jumble of random times people got censored for saying fuck, there's very little coherency or consistent "story" there. I've got an outline going offwiki and I currently have the modern usage grouped with the grammar, which would include the stuff on how and why it's offensive, compound forms, and all that. I want to keep a couple of the notable uses in politics (e.g. Dick Cheney telling someone to go fuck themselves on the Senate floor, not every time Bono said "fuck") and merge that with the censorship section. Then I could include the really controversial uses (basically the ones that get cited in scholarly literature, not just the news), mistranslations, minced oaths, and very prominent instances where fuck was censored out of something where it was important. What do you think? (sorry if this is incoherent, I haven't finished my coffee yet...) Thanks for your time/input! :) Best, Keilana&#124;Parlez ici 17:46, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for consulting me about improving an article on Wikipedia related to Freedom of speech.


 * I'd strongly suggest you first watch the documentary Fuck (film) and read the book Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties.


 * Both are highly informative but in particular the film itself has an interesting topical structure and format that could be useful to you for ideas.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:26, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Fuck:
Hi Cirt! I have completed the GA review and placed the article on hold; Talk:Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/GA1. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much Diannaa I'll respond there soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Marked articles for GA Review
Marked the following articles for upcoming GA Reviews: Will post some updates here along the way. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Morleigh Steinberg
 * 2) Adam Mickiewicz
 * 3) Wordless novel
 * 4) Wilhelm Busch
 * 5) The Shortest Way with the Dissenters
 * Update: Morleigh Steinberg status of GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:12, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Adam Mickiewicz placed as GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Passed Wordless novel as GA quality. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Next, to revisit Talk:Morleigh Steinberg/GA1‎. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:33, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Passed Morleigh Steinberg. Next, on to review for Wilhelm Busch. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Left message with nominator for something to address pre-review of Wilhelm Busch. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:32, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: The Shortest Way with the Dissenters passed as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

These two are left. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Adam Mickiewicz on GA Hold.
 * 2) Wilhelm Busch awaiting response first for Talk:Wilhelm_Busch by GA nominator.
 * Passed Wilhelm Busch as GA. Only one left of this set is Adam Mickiewicz, which is GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:26, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Any chance for a review?
Sorry to bother you but this FAC has been up since April 21 and I was wondering if you would be kind enough to leave a review? It would be very much appreciated. Best, jona  talk to me  20:03, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I've got a few other GA Reviews to get to, but I'll think about this one on the back burner for now. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:04, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fine and thanks for replying. Best, jona  talk to me  20:07, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

FLC Review
Hi again, just wondering if you could take a few minutes to review the List of Kings Island attractions list that I nominated for FLC status. The review has stalled and I need some more opinions. If you don't want to review it, don't have the time, etc, its ok, I understand. :) -- Dom497 ( talk ) 14:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Still got a few GA Reviews ahead first but I'll try to take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries! :) -- Dom497 ( talk ) 15:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Help with Tiko Kerr
Hi Cirt, I am taking a jab and putting up an article. Could you make (or do them yourself) suggestions to improve the article? My thoughts are to have everything in there and have editors weed out what they don't want.Desaderal (talk) 02:31, 24 June 2013 (UTC)Desaderal
 * Sorry, no time right now, busy with other quality improvement projects related to Freedom of speech, but good luck to you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:32, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Three for to have teh reviewing
These GA candidates look interesting: I'll update here along the review process. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:01, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) When God Writes Your Love Story
 * 2) The Fox, the Wolf and the Husbandman
 * 3) Just Give Me a Cool Drink of Water 'fore I Diiie
 * Update: When God Writes Your Love Story placed as GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:25, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking on this review. I have responded there. Neelix (talk) 03:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the responses, will take another look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * When God Writes Your Love Story passed as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I have nominated the article for featured status here. I thought that, as the good article reviewer, you should be notified of the featured article candidacy. Any contributions you are willing to provide in the discussion would be greatly appreciated. Neelix (talk) 12:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, will take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Update: The Fox, the Wolf and the Husbandman placed as GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Just Give Me a Cool Drink of Water 'fore I Diiie placed as GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Which I've just finished addressing. Hope it's to your satisfaction, and thanks for the review. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * And again! Most recent comments addressed now, I believe.  Thanks again. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:27, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Passed it as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:39, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) Colin Farrell - one more for review. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:52, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Adam Mickiewicz/GA1
Replied there. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied back there, a little more left to do first. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * @Piotrus, still a commented out portion of text, Wyka notes contradictory dates in available sources, should instead be a sourced footnote. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Update: @Piotrus, looks a bit better, this image File:Adam Mickiewicz Monument, Kraków.jpg should be deleted as it's now duplicated at Wikimedia Commons. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I moved it, so it's tagged with NowCommons, so there's not much I can do beyond that; it's not like I can delete it, now, can I? There's a huge move to Commons backlog, but the last time I asked the community to be allowed to help with it, it didn't go the way I hoped, so... :/ --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 22:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Understood, Piotrus, no worries, I'll have another look, but it won't be for a little while, I'm traveling out of town in remote areas with limited Internet access at the moment. Will keep you posted, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This one is done. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:33, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Younger Actor in a Drama Series/archive1
Hey there, I was hoping if you can give me opinions and comments on Featured list candidates/Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Younger Actor in a Drama Series/archive1 as you have done for Featured list candidates/Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Younger Actress in a Drama Series/archive1?? I would love to hear what you have to say.Please and Thank you. It will be greatly appreciated! Regards SoapFan12 00:00, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Not much time now, other quality improvement projects on my plate and GA Reviews, but will try to take a look but it might be a while. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This discussion appears to have since been closed. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

RE:The Fox, the wolf and the Husbandman/GA1
I believe that I have completed the comments that you make in your review of the article, including an expansion of Analysis, a citation inclusion, image replacement, and the page for a link has kindly been created by someone else. Cheers, MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 19:50, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, MasterOfHisOwnDomain, sounds good. Unfortunately I'm on limited Internet access at the moment due to traveling in remote areas, should be able to respond to this hopefully within about a week or so. :) Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:50, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * @ MasterOfHisOwnDomain, looks like there's now a total of two (2) scholars cited in the Analysis subsection, any chance there are others, possibly at least two more or so? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This one is done. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Drama Series/archive1
I know I have asked you before if you can give comments however you had other quality improvement projects on you're plate and GA Reviews. I was wondering if you are interested on reviewing: Featured list candidates/Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Drama Series/archive1. If it's not possible for you, I understand. But it will be greatly appreciated! :) SoapFan12 03:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, SoapFan12, I'm traveling through some remote areas at the moment with not the best Internet access. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:48, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, I understand. Thanks for willing! I don't want to sound impatient, but would it be possible to give comments when you comeback? SoapFan12 21:20, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll be pretty busy at that point, and tired from all the traveling, but I'll try to remember to have a look at it. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:02, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Commented there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey there!
Hey there Cirt, it's been a long while! I decided to log on because I was curious to see how things were around the wikis these days, and I couldn't help but reminisce my past experiences on here. I especially remembered you and me working together on Wikiquote and Wikipedia, so I decided to drop by, and by the looks of your recent contributions, you're still the well and active person I've always known you as. How are you? &mdash; RyanCross  ( talk ) 04:14, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied at user talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

She Has a Name
Hi Cirt,

Thank you for expressing an interest in the She Has a Name articles. I thought that, as the good article reviewer for the 2012 tour of She Has a Name article, you should be notified of this merger proposal. Any comments you are willing to provide there, whether in support or opposition, would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 15:10, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, commented. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Mercury Radio Arts for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mercury Radio Arts is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Mercury Radio Arts until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  DGG ( talk ) 03:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, I'll respectfully defer to the outcome of the consensus from the discussion of the community, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Dronabinol
Hallo. For some years ago you closed Articles for deletion/Marinol, and deleted the redirect to the article Dronabinol. But the content of the redirect had been merged into tetrahydrocannabinol (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tetrahydrocannabinol&diff=229067314&oldid=229064481 and some edits before). I ask you to undelete Dronabinol. Christian75 (talk) 20:30, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You'll have to ask an admin or at WP:AN about that. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. Christian75 (talk) 08:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments
I was wondering if you review my featured list article (Featured list candidates/Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series/archive1)? Please, it will be greatly appreciated! SoapFan12 21:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll see if I can get some time to look at this soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Help
I need help with a wikipeida based project. The Space Ghost Coast to Coast episode "Baffler Meal" has a prominent role in the development in the log running series Aqua Teen Hunger Force. The original page was deleted as it had a lack of reliable citations or information that was not in-universe. I feel as though I could re-write the episode page completely and find better sources and better information. However the page was locked to the point it can't be restored or even redirected anywhere else. What do you recommend I should do? Grapesoda22 (talk) 23:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I would suggest posting to WP:RFPP for request for unprotection of the page, and discussing with posts to talk pages of relevant WikiProjects. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Olly Blackburn
No problemo! Did notice you have other film-related articles in the backlog, so should they be unattended for about another week, I'll be more than happy to review them if required. Lemonade51 (talk) 17:25, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ping -- Talk:Robert Boulter/GA1‎. Been meaning to do some GA reviews this week, but I haven't had time to. I'll probably get round to doing some this weekend. Lemonade51 (talk) 23:35, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks much, I'll get to addressing those helpful points. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:20, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This one is done. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:33, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Another one → Talk:Sian Breckin/GA1. Lemonade51 (talk) 22:11, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Lemonade51, I've addressed that one as well, at its review subpage. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Report
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Freedom of Speech for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -buffbills7701
 * @User:Buffbills7701, yes, I'd love to participate in this. You can ask others at WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech by posting to their user talk pages and also to the project talk page at WT:WikiProject Freedom of speech. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I already did that. buffbills7701 11:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * @User:Buffbills7701, that's great, thank you! I see some great contributors have responses there. I've added a few answers as well. Looks like the interview is shaping up quite nicely. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Juan Manuel López (racing driver)
Hi there Cirt! Whilst doing some gnoming on DAB pages, I came across this article. I believe this guy is actually notable based on a quick search - see the series listed here, so could you put the deleted page into my userspace? That way, we keep together the history, and I (possibly) am saved some effort in re-writing the thing. Thanks in advance :) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 13:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * @ User:Lukeno94, I suggest you post about this idea to talk pages of related WikiProjects. And I'm no longer an admin, so you can request help in a new post to WP:AN, if you wish. Good luck, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, my bad. As for posting to various WikiProjects, I'm not sure why this is necessary? I'm not going to attempt to guess your knowledge of motorsport, but I know that he's competed multiple times in an international series. :) I'll contact an active sysop and see if they can help, before going to AN. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 18:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds good, hope it goes well for you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:40, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Corporate project
Hi Cirt. I have been in touch with a company that wants to have a Wikipedia page. They've tried once or twice themselves and clearly don't know how to create a proper article. They are thinking about hiring one of these article writing services. Naturally I've told them that these approaches aren't too smart, but I'm also sensitive to the fact that they are a good size company, probably notable, and the lack of a Wikipedia article is harming their reputation. Google now places an excerpt from Wikipedia in the right rail of the search results. When a company doesn't have that, it makes them look unsubstantial.

I suggested to this company that they could potential get an article by offering some sort of charitable contribution and seeing if that would motivate an uninterested editor to become interested. For instance, they could donate something like $500 - $1000 to Rotary International's PolioPlus project. I don't feel good asking volunteers to create value for a for-profit enterprise without payment, but I also don't feel good about paid editing.

What do you think of this idea? Jehochman Talk 16:38, 22 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks again for thinking of me for interesting quality improvement projects to Wikipedia, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:26, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Replies by Cirt, please respond below all of them, and thank you for thinking of me!
 * 1) @Jehochman, a few questions:
 * 2) Just wanted to check with you first, again as in with the prior case you asked me about for article page: Chris Field (composer) (now a WP:GA candidate), if this sort of quality improvement project is permitted for me under my current existing Arbitration restrictions? I'll respect your judgment about that, but I don't yet know the topic of this company and wanted to get your analysis, first?
 * 3) What genre is this company, does it somehow dovetail its mission with the general subject of freedom of speech?
 * 4) How about in addition to a donation to Rotary International's PolioPlus project  there could also be a donation to a freedom of speech related nonprofit organization, such as Electronic Frontier Foundation or the Digital Media Law Project?
 * I could ask them to direct a donation to one of those causes. They are a payroll services company--pretty cut and dry--no politics either way. I don't think there would be any conflict with the arbitration restrictions. Jehochman Talk 04:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay Jehochman sounds good. I'm going to be slowed down from a medical recovery issue for a while, but I'll try to find some time to work on it, just won't be as quick as the last one. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No rush at all. For the record, the company is Paycom.  The first step would be to independently determine whether they are notable or not. Jehochman Talk 14:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Review???
Hey, I was wondering if you are still on board, on reviewing my FLC article? SoapFan12 Talk   14:04, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, SoapFan12, I'm recovering from some health issues at the moment, I'll be a little slow to respond to various queries. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:36, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, I understand. — SoapFan12 Talk Face-smile.svg   19:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it's a tiring recovery process. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Photo consensus discussion at Talk:Rick Remender
Hi. Can you offer your opinion regarding the Infobox photo discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 19:17, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Nightscream, don't want to delve into other arenas, recovering from some health issues at the moment, good luck, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:21, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Note to self re pending review
Going to get to this one soon, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:54, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Colin Farrell

Get well soon!
DoctorCaligari (talk) 01:48, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, for the kind wishes. It's a tiring process, getting better slowly day-by-day. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK RfC

 * As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat&#124;Contributions 03:04, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon - TFAR nomination
I've nominated Everything Tastes Better with Bacon at WP:TFAR for consideration for International Bacon Day.

More info at Today's featured article/requests.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:37, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

The History of British Political Parties

 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:50, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

The BLT Cookbook

 * Okay sounds good, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

United Kingdom Election Results

 * Okay, sounds good, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks again, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Colin Farrell GA review
Were you able to get to this? How did it go? --Aichik (talk) 23:46, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, Aichik, dealing with some health issues but will get to it soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:22, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:49, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Colin Farrell article work
thanks so much!!--Aichik (talk) 16:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, but there's still a lot to be done before GA quality. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:35, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Judith Krug
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Judith Krug 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 GA bot, on behalf of GregJackP -- 13:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

GAN review Judith Krug
Good work. On hold for ref #7. Once that is corrected, it is good for GA. GregJackP  Boomer!   13:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This has since been done. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Judith Krug
The article Judith Krug you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Judith Krug for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of GregJackP -- 17:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR RFC
There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, I'll try to take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

GA Thanks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks for your editorial contributions to Judith Krug, which has recently become a WP:GA.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the acknowledgement! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Kellie Loder
Hi Cirt,

Thank you very much for your helpful reviews of the articles I have written in the past. I have submitted another article for featured status: the Kellie Loder article. Any comments you would be willing to provide at the FAC would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 15:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Busy and in and out of town but will try to take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Cirt! I hope things calm down for you soon. Neelix (talk) 03:11, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, still a bit hectic, will be in touch. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:24, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Colin Farrell as GA
Have worked substantially on this since your recommendations. Please take a look when you have a minute at both the article and its talk page. thanks--Aichik (talk) 21:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, will have another look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:24, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Everything Tastes Better with Bacon
This is a note to let the main editors of Everything Tastes Better with Bacon know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on August 31, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or one of his delegates (,, and ), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/August 31, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon is a book about cooking with bacon written by Sara Perry, a food commentator and columnist for The Oregonian. Her editor at Chronicle Books suggested bacon as a cookbook subject. Bacon's popularity and usage was increasing, but Perry believed that a paucity of recipes would make writing the book difficult. Recalling her fondness for honey-baked ham, she combined sugar and bacon to create dishes and realized that bacon could be used to add seasoning in flavoring dishes, including salads and pastas. The book includes recipes for bacon-flavored dishes and desserts. It was published in the United States in 2002 and in a French language edition in 2004 in Montreal. It received mainly positive reviews and its recipes were selected for inclusion in The Best American Recipes 2003–2004. The St. Petersburg Times classed it as among one of the "most interesting and unique cookbooks" published, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette highlighted it in the article "Favorite Cookbooks for 2002" and The Denver Post included it in a list of best cookbooks of 2002. One review criticized a lack of creativity in the choice of recipes. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:24, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, this brings back memories. Congrats on another FA. Hope all is well. Gamaliel ( talk ) 03:12, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Tastes great! Good company for my singing profeti, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:10, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Congrats on the Main Page appearance! I made a note of your accomplishment here. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 21:21, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for this acknowledgement! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:18, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

FPOC
Portal:Judaism has been nominated for featured portal status. Would you be able to leave a few comments? -- Ypnypn (talk) 20:55, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll try to take a look soon, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Much appreciated! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:18, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

A double whammy...
and...

An invitation per your interest in food-related topics. Thanks for your efforts to improve the encyclopedia! Northamerica1000(talk) 01:33, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:18, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Category:Columbia University publications
Category:Columbia University publications, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. SL7968 09:48, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:18, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Takes Portland 2013!
-- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:02, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Best wishes
Hi Cirt, I hope you are well, and that we can correspond soon. Jehochman Talk 02:05, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, doing a bit better, a bit busy but otherwise okay, sounds good. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:31, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

When God Writes Your Love Story
Hi Cirt,

Considering that you were the good article nomination reviewer for the When God Writes Your Love Story article, I thought that you should be notified of the current discussions on its talk page. Any input you would be willing to provide there would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 18:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Cirt,


 * Because you participated in the FAC for the When God Writes Your Love Story article, I thought that you should be notified of the article's current featured article review. Any constructive comments you would be willing to provide there would be greatly appreciated.


 * Neelix (talk) 19:39, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Whaam! v. H. C. McNeile
Given your interest in contributing to the main page scheduling discussions, I feel it is appropriate to inform you that you have supported a 2-point article for September 28th and now a 5-point article has been nominated for the same date at WP:TFAR.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * A bit busy with recovery process and swamped with IRL work after that, but will try to take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Note to self Colin Farrell
Note to self Colin Farrell, finish up GA Review and move on to next stuff soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Will defer to 2nd opinion on this one. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:04, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 16:51, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


 * ✅. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Reaching out
Hi, hope this finds you & your's well.

Sorry for the interuption but I couldn't think of anyone else who is WP familar, discreet & know well-enough from Wikisource to bother to ask.

I'm concerned that a particular User: (Arzel) is subverting the community dealing with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by making removals under an anon IP account (69.173.6.5) because removals under the logged in account more often run into opposition/restoration than not.

What is the best way to verify my theory without falsely accusing a User: of fairly OK standing (though the Conservative streak seems to be constant crutch for him/her)? And as an aside, where would I find the policy on such things for WP? Thanks in advance -- George Orwell III (talk) 21:47, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The only thing I know of would be to file a request for investigation at WP:SPI. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 08:03, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Category:Worth Bingham Prize recipients
Category:Worth Bingham Prize recipients, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 04:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification,, I'll respectfully defer to the outcome from the community consensus of that discussion. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:53, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chris Field (composer)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chris Field (composer) 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 Taylor Trescott -- 01:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Taylor Trescott, sounds good. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chris Field (composer)
The article Chris Field (composer) 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:Chris Field (composer) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Taylor Trescott -- 21:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chris Field (composer)
The article Chris Field (composer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chris Field (composer) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Taylor Trescott -- 18:12, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! That makes 100 WP:GA contributions to Wikipedia. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Review
Hey, I would really appreciate if you could review my FLC? — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 09:52, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * A bit busy with life but will try to take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you know when you will try to take a look? — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 18:30, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, I'm pretty busy with several pressing matters at the moment. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Freedom for the Thought That We Hate
This is a note to let the main editors of Freedom for the Thought That We Hate know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on September 25, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/September 25, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate is a 2007 non-fiction book by Anthony Lewis about freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of thought, and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Lewis discusses key free speech case law, including U.S. Supreme Court opinions in United States v. Schwimmer (1929), New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), and New York Times Co. v. United States (1971). The book's title is drawn from the dissenting opinion by Associate Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (pictured) in United States v. Schwimmer, who wrote: "if there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other, it is the principle of free thought—not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate." The book was positively received by The New York Times, Harvard Magazine, Nat Hentoff, two National Book Critics Circle members, and Kirkus Reviews. Jeremy Waldron criticized the work in The New York Review of Books and elaborated on this in The Harm in Hate Speech (2012). This prompted a critical analysis of both works in The New York Review of Books by former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you, this is exciting to be able to see an article about freedom of speech featured on the Main Page! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I couldn't agree more, as I'm a huge fan of Anthony Lewis! I was really glad to learn of the upcoming Main Page appearance, and thrilled to see one of my favorite quotes in the quotebox ("There will always be authorities who try to make their own lives more comfortable by suppressing critical comment....").   I have used it many times over the last two months, ever since my community has become embroiled in a highly polarizing controversy against those very authorities who have been attempting to squelch the thoughts that they hate.  In fact, my contributions on Wikipedia have fallen off dramatically these last two months, but don't worry, I'll be back once we're done restoring basic constitutional rights to seemingly-idyllic Cape Cod.  Already, our police chief has been suspended and is under investigation, and our Town Manager and Chairman of the Board of Selectmen are in the hot-seat for attempting to sweep the chief's over-the-top trouncing of free speech right under the rug...
 * Btw, thanks for compressing down those ref's; I merely did that because they all started looking alike when I was trying to sort them out, and meant to collapse them back... Thanks again,  — Groll &tau;ech  ( talk ) 01:04, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Great article, great book, great title line. I think of it every time that I see an infobox referred to as an idiotbox (example pictured) ;) - Campaigning for reconciliation, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 08:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It's good to see this finally up on the main page. It looks great. Keep up the awesome work! Neelix (talk) 13:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, a bit busy lately but will try to get to some more freedom of speech related projects soon! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:16, 26 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Btw, a great article & look forward to other FOS projects you work on. & thanks for your response on talk page Manytexts (talk) 02:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:38, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Ghost of Sparta FAC
There seems to be a lack of interest for the God of War: Ghost of Sparta FAC. Would you care to leave some comments? -- JDC808  ♫  03:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Quite busy with other projects, but will try to take a look if I get a chance. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World
I've created the new article about the book Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World, which discusses the subject of targeted killing.
 * Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World

Further suggestions for research and additional secondary sources would be appreciated, at the article's talk page, at Talk:Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World.

Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

68th Academy Awards (1996)
Hi there,

I was wondering if you could proofead 68th Academy Awards for featured list status. Please leave comments at: Featured list candidates/68th Academy Awards/archive1. I understand your busy schedule, but it would be greatly appeciated.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 18:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, will try to take a look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Edit-athon!
Hope to see you there! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:43, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice, unfortunately I'll be busy, but have fun! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck"
Very surprising to not see Glengarry Glen Ross (film) listed. Can you check but I think there's way more than 150 f bombs in the movie. In fact it seems more than even Goodfellas at times, but it's not as consistent throughout the movie as Goodfellas.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:02, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the interest, Dr. Blofeld, Glengarry Glen Ross (film) and Goodfellas are both great films. According to this secondary source, Entertainment Weekly, it's used 128 times in Glengarry Glen Ross (film), whereas the cited listing for Goodfellas notes 300 usages. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:11, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Glenngarry is under 100 minutes I think that's probably why. The rate seems similar to that of Goodfellas, even more so in the middle, but in Goodfellas it's more consistent throughout its 2.5 hr length thanks to Joe Pesci! ♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree with your analysis. Now I'll have to re-watch both those films again sometime soon! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:18, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Please see my reply at User talk:Northamerica1000. Thanks. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:39, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:43, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of article
There's an article about a brazilian journalist which was proposed for deletion, and you agreed that it was reasonable, as it is in the page of discussion over it. Why it hasn't been done so yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.127.81.38 (talk) 01:52, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't recall making any comments about something like that, could you give a specific link to it? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Olavo_de_Carvalho "The result was delete" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.127.81.128 (talk) 16:45, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That was over two years ago. Someone else must have recreated the article with sources. I'll defer to community consensus, but I'd say at this point in time you could follow the procedure at WP:AFD to have another debate again. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

hmmm hmmmm
swag — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.25.194.4 (talk) 07:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Missing Talk Page Archives
Very inexperienced editor here, perhaps you can help. I noticed that the archives for Talk:Large-group awareness training were red links (ex: Talk:Large-Group Awareness Training/Archive 4. After hunting around, I found them.. the article was renamed (someone added the hyphen) but the archives weren't.(ex: Talk:Large Group Awareness Training/Archive 4).

Should I change the "FULLPAGENAME" tag on the talk page links to the old name so they link to the archives? Copy/paste the archive pages to their new namespaces (and blank the old ones)? Or is there a proper way to rename archive pages following a page rename?

I'm sorry to bother you but I'd noticed that you were the last one to archive the talk page (way back in 2007!), and was going to ask "where'd you archive it too?" but managed to figure out that much on my own. If you can tell me the proper way of dealing with that (I couldn't find the answer myself), I'd greatly appreciate it. I've noticed missing talk page archives before, but never knew how to fix them.

Sorry again for bothering you, and thanks for helping a casual editor out! &#32;- Syd (talk) 05:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * &#32;- Syd thanks for your interest, I think the best easy fix solution for your query is to just make redirects to the existing pages. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * , actually the easiest thing is for an admin to move the article's talk page back and repeat the move to the new talk page name, this time ticking the box to move the talk subpages too (something only admins and bots can do), so your request is ✅ BencherliteTalk 19:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and thank you. But redirects are cheap, and help in case the page might get moved again in the future, etc. Anyways, glad that could be resolved without my involvement. ;) Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:01, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * There are now redirects from the old to the new subpages, so I've done exactly what you suggest but in a much easier way than manually creating five redirects. BencherliteTalk 20:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm confused, then why is there still a redlink at the top of this sect? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:06, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Because the article has never been at Large-Group Awareness Training (capital L, hyphen, capital G), so that's a bad talk archive link. Old version: capital L, capital G; new version: capital L, hyphen, lower-case g. BencherliteTalk 20:09, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, understood. Redirects are cheap, but eh, I'll defer to whatever others in the community wish to do about that. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks both of you! Redirects would let editors fix it, but I can see that's not the preferred solution. Next time I see red linked archives, I'll ask an admin if they can do the talk page re-move thing. Thanks again &#32;- Syd (talk) 22:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Lisa the Skeptic
Heya, just notice you've put on Today's featured article/requests/pending for November 23rd. Would you be fine with removing it to allow a Doctor Who article, probably "The Stolen Earth", on that date instead? Sceptre (talk) 14:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, Sceptre, where do you think could go, relatively soon, instead? Maybe "The Stolen Earth" could go on the 22nd or 24th? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You may not be aware, Cirt, that 23rd November is the 50th anniversary of Doctor Who, which is why Sceptre is suggesting this. See "The Day of the Doctor". BencherliteTalk 15:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I was not aware, thank you, Bencherlite. May I ask that appear on the 24th? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've got no objection myself, but TFA/R might. Sceptre (talk) 17:14, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I think that would be a satisfactory compromise solution to this predicament, don't you? :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Nominate it at TFAR and see what happens. Some people may approve, others may think that we don't really need two TV articles on consecutive days. BencherliteTalk 19:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, that would be quite an unfortunate outcome, is there some other way we can come to an amicable resolution to this? :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Take it to TFAR and see what is said there - that's one of the ideas of the page, after all ;-) BencherliteTalk 20:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's all well and good, but I fear it would result in your 2nd possible outcome. I just think it is very important and educational to educate our readers about the field of scientific skepticism. I hope there is a way to satisfy all parties involved. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Update: @User:Bencherlite and @User:Sceptre: I've added Lisa the Skeptic as a request at WP:TFAR for the date of 24 November 2013. Hopefully my request will not be futile? :) Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Followed by DIFF. Removal of on Today's featured article/requests/pending for November 23rd. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I moved Lisa the Skeptic to 4 November. That way, there's enough of a time gap between two TV episodes. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:30, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose
Yeah, that was a little hasty. I'll change it to "Neutral" for now, so I can think about it for a bit.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 21:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, User:Taylor Trescott. I appreciate that. Very much. I hope you will give it thought with regards to the educational value and not think of it just as a TV episode. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:48, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Fuck

 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:44, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Glad to help; I enjoy the articles you work on. All the best,  Mini  apolis  20:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh wonderful, my pleasure, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Lisa the Skeptic
This is a note to let the main editors of Lisa the Skeptic know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 4, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/November 4, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

"Lisa the Skeptic" is the eighth episode of The Simpsons ' ninth season, first aired in November 1997. On an archaeological dig with her class, Lisa discovers a skeleton that resembles an angel. All of the townspeople believe that the skeleton actually came from an angel, but skeptical Lisa attempts to persuade them that there must be a rational scientific explanation, asking the American paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould to test a sample. After Gould tells Lisa that the tests were inconclusive, she compares the belief in angels to the belief in unicorns and leprechauns and in response, Springfield's religious zealots go on a rampage to destroy all scientific institutions. The episode's writer David X. Cohen (pictured) developed the idea after visiting the American Museum of Natural History, and decided to loosely parallel themes from the Scopes Monkey Trial. There were mixed reviews. It has been discussed in the context of virtual reality, ontology, existentialism, and skepticism; it has also been used in Christian religious education classes to initiate discussion about angels, skepticism, science, and faith. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Okey, here we go ... &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:34, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Nefarious: Merchant of Souls
Hi Cirt,

Thank you for your support of the Nefarious: Merchant of Souls featured article candidacy. Eddie Hugh has voiced his concern that there are no film reviews cited in the article that are negative or that compare the film to other documentaries about human trafficking. If you have time to help me in addressing and/or responding to these concerns, I would be grateful for any assistance you are able to provide.

Neelix (talk) 20:29, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Quite busy in life at the moment, but will try to take a look soon, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅, commented there, diff, hopefully this is helpful to resolve the issues involved. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Could have I infringed any copyright without realising it?
Hello, I am the author of the article "Historical inheritance systems" and its related sub-articles, such as "systems of social stratification". I am afraid I may have infringed the copyright of some articles... Please, can you check it out? I do not have the intention of infringing any copyright, If I have done it it's been just a mistake on my part and I would inmediately delete it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ansegam (talk • contribs)
 * Quite busy at the moment, will try to take a look soon and/or notify other parties who are experienced in these matters, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ansegam (talk • contribs) 13:48, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I asked to have a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Atif Ali Khan
Please check Atif Ali Khan against the version that was deleted in 2011 to see if it's db-repost-eligible and if so, tag it or bag it. Thanks. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)  00:22, 29 October 2013 (UTC) disregard, it's already been checked. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)  00:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks for the update, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:09, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello!
I quoted something you said at Featured list candidates/Citra Award for Best Leading Actress/archive1 on Wikipedia talk:Red link. If you disapprove of that, or the context I did so, I will be happy to remove it.--T. Anthony (talk) 02:28, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Okey, thanks for the notice, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for help with peer review
Hello-

You have been a great help to me in the past and so I am hoping you can help again with the peer review of List of Detroit Red Wings award winners. Any input would be vastly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Regards, Rejectwater (talk) 23:47, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Quite busy lately but will try to take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 09:39, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅, commented there, diff, hope it's helpful, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

ANI discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Tgeairn (talk) 01:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * My response there, diff:


 * 1) Comment: To my knowledge I have not made any edits on English Wikipedia in violation of the topic ban and I have been very careful not to do so.
 * 2) Whatever the community decides to do on pages where I don't edit is up to the community and I'll of course respectfully defer to the community consensus on whatever those issues are.
 * 3) It doesn't appear that my actions are in question on English Wikipedia.
 * 4) Therefore I won't weigh in with any opinion either way about what should be done on Wikipedia related to those topics.
 * Thank you for your time, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:39, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I didn't know how else to address the concern, other than leaving it in an edit request on a low traffic talk page (which was unlikely to work). I appreciate your quick response. Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 02:01, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Note to self: Result of closure of the ANI thread. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:22, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Calisthenics
Time for some pushups, methinks.

Maybe twenty will do the trick for now.

We'll see.

Cheers,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Fuck featured article candidate discussion
Fuck (film) is a candidate for Featured Article quality &mdash; comments would be appreciated at Featured article candidates/Fuck (film)/archive1.
 * Fuck (film)

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:09, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Just seen your comment on my talkpage from 3 days ago (hate the orange messagebar not working...) about moving minor comments - yes, fine with me. Good luck with the FAC.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 07:22, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Fuck FAC
I've just mad a final edit (typo and a strike), fine with me  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  14:11, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅, thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:15, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Scope and title for Bisexuality in the Arab world
During the recent AfD for Bisexuality in the Arab world (closed as 'keep') you will either have seen opinions expressed to expand the scope of the article, or voiced that opinion yourself. I am placing this notice on the talk pages of all who expressed an opinion of whatever type in that deletion discussion to invite you to participate in a discussion on article scope and title at Talk:Bisexuality in the Arab world. You are cordially invited to participate. By posting this message I am not seeking to influence your opinion one way or another. Fiddle  Faddle  10:30, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Okey thanks for the notice, a bit busy in life right now so I think I'll respectfully defer to the community consensus from that discussion. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:59, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Conflict of interested?
Block log PBS creation of Targeted killing (disambiguation). Seems to me that is a conflict of interests. -- PBS (talk) 20:05, 8 November 2013 (UTC) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm not an admin anymore.
 * 2) My quality improvement on the topic has occurred a long period of time after that block.
 * 3) The conflict of interest actually applies to, who has been active and reverting multiple times on the topic of targeted killing for a long period of time, at least back as far as 2006.
 * Fwiw, I don't see this as a conflict of interest. Cirt asked for my opinion here. The block occurred 3 years ago.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 00:05, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no conflict of interest over the article targeted killing as I have not taken any administrative action on that page. I would not have raised the issue if I had realised that  your broom had been removed. -- PBS (talk) 14:01, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks for acknowledging you wouldn't have raised the issue had you known that. You assert you don't have a conflict of interest on targeted killing but you certainly have an "interest" of some sort going back at least for a period of time of over seven (7) years. Have a great day, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * That I don't deny (I have not see enough to change my POV from that expressed in the diff to which you linked). I used to do far more work on controversial subjects than I do now, as a sort of self inflicted duty because so many of them had had an explicit intended POV, or one simply created as a result of systemic bias -- the unthinking use of "terrorist" in the passive narrative is as an example. I do less of that now, partly because many of the changes have stuck (eg Terrorism) or List of massacres->List of events named massacres) and partly because I though I had spent enough time on them as they are such time sinks.  -- PBS (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * PBS, I myself am not of the opinion that we should be defending or attacking the practice of targeted killing. But I am of the opinion that the topic is notable, it has received scholarly coverage from academic sources by multiple authors and multiple books devoted solely to the topic published by noteworthy publishers such as Oxford University Press, and it deserves coverage on Wikipedia describing such secondary source coverage and detailing the perspectives of these academics from multiple viewpoints. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:55, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * As I said its a time sink, I do not think that the subject should have been separated from assassination, but see my last comment at Talk:Targeted killing -- PBS (talk) 19:16, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, so you are deferring to community consensus as expressed by the WP:RFC, that is a good thing! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Seems to me I recall that PBS was communicated with by the community in that RFC, with resounding consensus community disagreement with his POV directly expressed. One of the more emphatic RFC results I've ever seen at the Project.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, the link is at Talk:Assassination/Archive_2, for those who wish to read the RFC. I'm glad we're all able to communicate politely at this point in time and move on from that, and defer to community consensus from the RFC. :) Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you very much, Banaster Giver Extra Polite, I really appreciate this a lot! Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:50, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

"Wiki Loves Libraries" edit-athon in Vancouver, WA
''You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active member of WikiProjectOregon or WikiProject Washington. This message was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:12, 9 November 2013 (UTC)''


 * Thanks for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

What about …
improving Morse v. Frederick together? I see there's a book out, and it's in the internet era so sourcing shouldn't be a major problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:27, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hustler Magazine v. Falwell pretty please?

I'd really really like to work on Hustler Magazine v. Falwell and getting that to FA.

It's really the only U.S. Supreme Court case on my mind right now that I'd be interested in working on.

Morse v. Frederick is a fascinating case indeed, but Hustler Magazine v. Falwell dovetails with my interests in freedom of speech, combined with other topics related to free speech like comedy, parody, and satire.

Just so we can be sure there's no existing problems on the article, I'd personally want to start in a userspace draft and then paste that in, effectively gutting the current article to start from scratch.

Whaddya say? :)

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:48, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * You mentioned freedom of speech on TFAR, made me smile soo much in the context, not without comedy, parody and satire, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:49, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see, I shall have to read up on that case a bit more. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:46, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't bother reading, it's a waste of time ;) - I didn't know a thing about arbcom cases, learned now (too late) that they are supposed only for major disputes the community can't fix, - there was no recent major dispute, the parties found compromises, but the arbs looked at the echoes of former wars. They gave me the freedom of adding infoboxes in articles I create, but I didn't "create" if I expanded a one-line stub, - and then they expect my respect? My template amuses me a lot ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Okey, understood, unfortunately. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

"The Unnatural" FAN
I have tried my best to implement your suggestions on "The Unnatural" FAN. How does the article look now?-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   20:12, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thanks for being so responsive to my comments. Good luck with the rest of the FAC, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:45, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Escape from Tomorrow
I completely understand why you added the Streisand effect category, even though how Disney's handling of Escape from Tomorrow is more of a case study on how to avoid the Streisand effect. :) Trivialist (talk) 00:25, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks, no worries! :) And agreed. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:29, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

List of Detroit Red Wings award winners Featured List nomination

 * List of Detroit Red Wings award winners

Notifying you because you participated in the Peer Review.

List of Detroit Red Wings award winners is a candidate for Featured List &mdash; comments would be appreciated at Featured list candidates/List of Detroit Red Wings award winners/archive1.

Thank you for your time. Kind regards, Rejectwater (talk) 00:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yup, I did participate in the Peer Review. Having a slushie at the moment but I'll take a look soon. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:52, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Status
I should get to Beck possibly Monday, I am traveling today. As for Hustler, it looks doable. Images are going to be a pain, but that's usually the case in this sort of article. Maybe next month sometime? I have a couple of other projects I want to get done first.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:38, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, in process of getting some research together for us. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion is valued at WikiProject Breakfast
As someone who used the talkpage in the past your opinion is valued at WikiProject Breakfast. Please see Want to be a guinea pig for Flow?. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:29, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅, commented there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World 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 Khazar2 -- 20:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks very much,, this is most appreciated! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:37, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World
The article Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 19:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:37, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

GA nomination situation
I've noticed your quality FAC reviews of late, and I wanted to thank you for that. I don't know if you normally perform GA nomination reviews, but I thought I'd let you know that Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution is currently nominated for GA status, and it could use a thorough reviewer. (The subject seems to within your area of interest, based on your edits.) This particular nomination has engendered a fair amount of controversy lately, and it would be quite helpful if an uninvolved reviewer stepped in and reviewed it. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 17:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * , I'll take a look at it, but I'm going out of town soon and will only have intermittent unreliable Internet access at best for a while. I could say I'll review it, but if I did it would either be with sporadic reliability of online access, or after I get back. Sorry but at this point that's the best I can do right now. On the other hand, it might be a good idea to let this wait a couple weeks for everyone to relax a bit and take a breather. Then, it'd be sensible for me to review it. What do you think of that option? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Whatever you think best is fine with me. If you signed up and were slow to review, I'm sure the nominator would be fine with it. If you give it a couple weeks, the situation might deteriorate... then again, it might work itself out without problems. Regardless, I hope you enjoy your trip! – Quadell (talk) 17:28, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't quite get it,, what if I signed up to review it, pending a read-through of the full article of course and putting together my thoughts, and so on, and then just waited a while to review it, like a little under a couple weeks? Would that be okay? Are you saying the situation would be stopped from deteriorating simply by having a 2nd GA Reviewer sign on, even if they don't do anything for a while? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:33, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No no, I think I misunderstood you. (I meant that if you waited a couple weeks to sign up to review it, the situation could be unstable.) Your solution sounds fine to me, so long as the nominator is okay with it. – Quadell (talk) 17:47, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay . Is the nominator okay with it? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:57, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * So,, what do you say? – Quadell (talk) 18:06, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, that'd be great. Cirt knows GA backwards and forwards at this point and I'm sure would give a good review; thanks for setting this up. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:21, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * Hey, congrats! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:36, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Quadell and Khazar2. Congratulations, Cirt, the article's great!  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 14:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you all, very much,, , and , this is really most appreciated! Thanks very much for your help on this quality improvement project getting this article about freedom of speech and censorship to WP:FA quality, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:33, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

 * Agreed, Magioladitis, and thank you very much! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:59, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Half Million Award and others
You're also welcome to display these userboxes:

Sorry to say we don't have a Featured Portal userbox yet, but you're welcome to jerry-rig the above template to make one! Thanks as always for your marvelous contributions; serving more than 1.75 million readers a year is no small feat, and that's only the top four of the many pages you've edited. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:32, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Dr. Who anniversary
Thanks for posting that Dr. Who mention on your User page. It reminded me that the Dr. Who special is today. Thanks, or I would have missed that! I had forgotten all about it until I saw your page!--Mark Miller (talk) 22:11, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Quick input
Hi Cirt. I saw that you gave the editor I am talking with a welcome tag and so I was wondering if you would chime in here regarding the reliability of PRWatch and Sourcewatch for contentious material about a BLP in the article on astroturfing. I figured it would be good to get another voice as only two editors being involved tends to lead to arguments. Cheers. CorporateM (Talk) 01:02, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I would if I could but I can't and I shan't. I gotta pack for my trip outta town soon, then will have limited Internet connectivity and reliability with spotty connections off and on. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:13, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. I think we ended up in an ok place, because there are some legit sources (New York Times). I noticed we have a lot of articles that cite or have external links to Sourcewatch that probably need to be cleaned up, but alas, there are so many large projects no single editor can do. Have a good trip! CorporateM (Talk) 05:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Star Trek for peer review

 * Portal:Star Trek

and myself have put Portal:Star Trek up for peer review.

We'd appreciate helpful feedback, at Portal peer review/Star Trek/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Beck v. Eiland-Hall for Peer Review

 * Beck v. Eiland-Hall

I've placed the article up for Peer Review.

Participation would be appreciated, at Peer review/Beck v. Eiland-Hall/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:36, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Freedom of speech - for peer review
I've placed Portal:Freedom of speech up for portal peer review. Comments would be welcome, at Portal peer review/Freedom of speech/archive1. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Portal:Freedom of speech

Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis


 * Well, that's inconvenient, but thank you for the notification,, most appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:47, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive

 * Thanks for the notification but at the moment out of town with intermittent online access. Will try to do some more GA Reviews when I'm more available. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive

 * Okay thanks for the notice, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:26, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Get your cameras ready! Christmas in Oregon and PDX Pods
This month, WikiProject Oregon features two photo campaigns:
 * PDX Pods
 * Christmas in Oregon

The concept is simple: upload photos of these two topics and share your work! Whether you upload one or one hundred, these images will help capture the culture of our state and illustrate Wikimedia projects. Have fun, and happy holiday season! ''You are receiving this because you are listed as an active member of WikiProject Oregon or WikiProject Washington. This message was delivered on behalf of Meetup/Portland by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)''


 * Thanks for the notice, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of T. Arthur Cottam
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article T. Arthur Cottam 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 Taylor Trescott -- 01:51, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

MD Rabbi Alam
Hello there,

I am trying to create a page for Mr. MD Rabbi Alam which was previously deleted by you for non reference.

Please see bellow and help me how to fix the previous problems.

Thank you.

1. This is the Link: You (Cirt) Delete the previous page: Articles_for_deletion/MD_Rabbi_Alam

2. This is the page I am trying to create: []

REf:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaeltleslie (talk • contribs)


 * Suggest you consult with talk pages of relevant WikiProjects for advice and also read pages including WP:Article development, WP:RS, WP:V, WP:BLP, WP:CITE, and WP:CIT. Good luck, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of T. Arthur Cottam
The article T. Arthur Cottam 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:T. Arthur Cottam for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Taylor Trescott -- 21:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Bacon WikiCup 2012 Award
Hey Cirt - remember me? :) Hope everything has been well. It's been forever since I disappeared from Wikipedia, but I decided to check back in out of nostalgia. I remember that I never actually gave out the awards for the 2012 Bacon WikiCup, which I apologize for. I know I'm really pushing it with "better late than never", but here it is: your very-long-overdue medal. Hopefully I'll stick around. Cheers! ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 23:29, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much,, much appreciated! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:41, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of T. Arthur Cottam
The article T. Arthur Cottam you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:T. Arthur Cottam for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Taylor Trescott -- 01:22, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:48, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World

 * Okay great, thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:13, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:27, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Judith Krug

 * Thanks very much,, this is another quality improvement project related to freedom of speech and censorship topics, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:18, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, it's an easy one to c/e. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:58, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Great job, thanks again, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:01, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Tom Braunlich
Hi Cirt,

I have a good source for Tom Braunlich, which you deleted after closing the AFD. Do you have any objections to userfication so that I can do some work on it? BOZ (talk) 16:24, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've no objections,, but as I'm no longer an admin someone else will have to help you with that. I'll defer to their judgement and that of the community. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:59, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, I can take care of this one myself. :) BOZ (talk) 20:35, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Technology for featured candidacy
I've nominated Portal:Technology for featured candidacy. Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Technology. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Portal:Technology

Two articles to review for GA
Saw these two over at Good article nominations/Topic lists/Language and literature, I'll read these over and review them: &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:46, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Goosebumps
 * 2) Fahrenheit 451
 * Update: Passed Goosebumps as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Coming up: Fahrenheit 451. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:49, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Fahrenheit 451 placed on GA Hold, primarily due to issues with missing citations, added fact tags, will revisit in a bit and hopefully this will have been successfully addressed. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:34, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've spotted a couple of other issues with Fahrenheit 451 and added them (it was on my list of things to maybe GA review). Things don't look good at the moment but I'll have a good look for sources myself, and hopefully the nominator's up for saving it too. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   12:34, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Update: Marked for review = OS X Mountain Lion. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:01, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Marked for review = Talk:Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution/GA2. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Left queries for nominators regarding Fahrenheit 451 and OS X Mountain Lion. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Update: Unfortunately, Fahrenheit 451 and OS X Mountain Lion marked as not GA at this time. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fucking Machines
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fucking Machines 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 Quadell -- 15:11, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, this is my latest quality improvement project related to freedom of speech and censorship. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:55, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fucking Machines
The article Fucking Machines 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:Fucking Machines for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 18:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, I went through and addressed your helpful recommendations, and noted each in the edit summaries. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:21, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fucking Machines
The article Fucking Machines you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fucking Machines for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 21:02, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Editing Mission: Earth, Voyage to the Home Planet

 * Thanks,, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Feathercoin copy?
Hi I noticed you wanted to keep the Feathercoin article. Do you happen to have a copy somewhere? I'm on a mission to rescue coin related WP articles about to be deleted by copying them to coinwiki.info, but I was a bit too late with FTC :/ Guaka (talk) 17:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry,, I don't have a copy. Perhaps you might try reconstructing a new version based on reliable secondary sources. Good luck, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Nah, I'm more tempted to build a more sustainable solution for deletionism: http://deleted.wiki.yt :) Guaka (talk) 18:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds good, have fun with it, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:41, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Main Page Featured Portal drive completed !!!
The Main Page Featured Portal drive was successfully completed.
 * Featured portal candidates/Main Page Featured Portal drive

This was a collaborative initiative created to get all portals linked from the top-right of the Main Page to Featured Portal quality status.

Thank you to all who participated or contributed towards this quality improvement effort in some way.

Happy Holidays,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/The Truth About Lies (film)
The original version of the article from 2011 was based upon on old and inaccurate source. Further research shows the project began filming December 2013 and is now in post-production. I made corrections/expansions to the article to address the original author's errors and have added a different set of "Find sources" at the AFD. I think the now-better-sourced and improved article. What you think?  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 02:47, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll have another look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Star Trek (TOS) novels
Hello, I am a newer editor looking for something to work on. I enjoy ST novels and own every one. I looked over what is already listed but most are just stubs or very basic info. I know these are not very high on the list of things to do, but it is an area I would feel quite comfortable working on. Could you point me to one or two articles that you think are well written or formatted so I can try to bring the stubs up to this level? Any help would be great! Yoe Dude (talk) 06:48, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I did some reading on the wiki and I am sorry for posting this on your page. I think I answered my own question researching. Notability (books)! While the list I found does list titles, there may be a good reason why they don't have their own pages. Sorry to bother you.Yoe Dude (talk) 09:38, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps could help you with this, I suggest contacting that user at their talk page, User talk:Miyagawa. Also, I recommend you post a message at WT:WikiProject Star Trek, they might be able to help you as well. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:00, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * A good model to follow is Spock Must Die!, as it is currently the only Star Trek novel to reach Good Article status. I've worked on a few on an ad-hoc basis (often because they've been included in the Google Books snapshot of the Voyages of Imagination book). A couple of other better articles are Uhura's Song or The Tears of the Singers - in fact the thing that lets those two down is that I haven't read either and so can't really summarise the plot better than what was already there! Miyagawa (talk) 12:35, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Apropos of nothing
Does "Cirt" have a hard C (like "Kurt") or a soft C (like in "certify")? – Quadell (talk) 15:56, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hard C is good. Sometimes I invented a particular acronym it stands for, and the first word in that abbreviation has a hard C sound. Thanks for the interest,, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:34, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Mission: Earth, Voyage to the Home Planet

 * Thanks,, if you check the talk page of that article I think you'll note there was already another copyeditor who stopped by there, but of course I'd appreciate another look from someone as experienced as yourself, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:33, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Cirt; I've now finished the copy-edit; I hope it's to your liking. ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes,, looks great, thank you very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:49, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Glad Tidings and all that ...
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:32, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Richard Smith (silent film director)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Richard Smith (silent film director) 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 Taylor Trescott -- 20:51, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for doing the review, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Richard Smith (silent film director)
The article Richard Smith (silent film director) 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:Richard Smith (silent film director) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Taylor Trescott -- 21:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, will note addressed comments on the subpage. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Richard Smith (silent film director)
The article Richard Smith (silent film director) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Richard Smith (silent film director) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Taylor Trescott -- 00:42, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:33, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Cirt!

 * Thanks very much. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:33, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Star Trek featured portal candidate
and I have nominated Portal:Star Trek as a featured portal candidate.
 * Portal:Star Trek

Commented would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Star Trek.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:24, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Freedom of speech portal for Featured candidate
I've nominated Portal:Freedom of speech for Featured quality consideration, discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Freedom of speech. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:48, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Deleted article - Album_Network_Expando_Tuneup_24
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Album_Network_Expando_Tuneup_24 After 6 years I logged on to find a lot of my contributions have been deleted, including this one. Kindly undelete thank you. Sa cooke (talk) 03:51, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It appears it's been moved to User:Sa cooke/Album Network Expando Tuneup 24. – Quadell (talk) 13:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, no objections from me to that. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Greetings
Greetings! I am the comm mgr for LPFI and was asked to look into restoring an article about our org: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Level_Playing_Field_Institute

You were the closing admin, so I am contacting you to inquiry about this since "significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page". Since the deletion, our organization has been covered in local and national media such as LA Times and Forbes. Plus it is mentioned (an linked) in Freada Kapor Klein's Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freada_Kapor_Klein

Please advise. Thanks! (teresha at lpfi dot org)50.193.9.105 (talk) 19:07, 7 January 2014 (UTC)Teresha
 * I'm no longer an admin, suggest you contact a current Administrator or ask at WP:AN, thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:27, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Spotted this from my watchlist and thought I'd drop by uninvited to add my comment. Using my super-strength admin "powers" to look at the deleted article Level Playing Field Institute, there are no references/sources in it and the promotionally worded text is not worth salvaging to use as the basis for a new article. However, as given your position in LPFI, I strongly suggest that you do not write about it on Wikipedia since you have an obvious conflict of interest which it would be very difficult for you to overcome. Wikipedia is not here to promote your worthy cause, after all. BencherliteTalk 02:35, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:17, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * As someone round these parts says, no worries... BencherliteTalk 16:19, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Freedom of Speech (painting)
I will review this article for WP:GAN. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:01, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Freedom of Speech (painting)
 * Update: Review progressing quite nicely, basically one remaining issue to address. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:33, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks ever so much, this is most appreciated! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Of interest
Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject_desk/Interviews2. Cheers, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:37, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Most interesting. I'm a bit busy at the moment but will try to take some time to read it over in depth soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:23, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Looking for reviewers
I am seeking reviewers for Featured article candidates/Armed Forces Special Weapons Project/archive1. I would hate to see it archived simply for want of reviews. If you could help, it would be much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:02, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * A bit busy at the moment but will certainly try to look it over soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

the Joy of Sect
Hallo Cirt, eine Ausseichungskandidatur wurde gestartet. Liebe Grüße Leif Czerny (talk) 21:17, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification. I will choose to respectfully defer to the outcome of that community process. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:19, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Sandbox talk page
Hi. I assumed you wanted User talk:Cirt/sandbox deleted too, but now I have doubts. If you didn't mean it to go, reply below here. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 22:45, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't, but thank you for deleting the other page. Can you please restore User talk:Cirt/sandbox? Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:46, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅. Sorry about that! JohnCD (talk) 22:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and no worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:49, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Need a suggestion
Hello Cirt, need a suggestion from you regarding an issue we are facing at the Indian film bio, movie articles. has been removing the unreleased film names from all filmography tables even though they are properly and reliably sourced and is the norm across the encyclopedia? We have had a consensus against this at the talk page of one of the articles, however, going on edit warring on this, violating WP:3RR continuously, this is not the way to handle things. We have requested the user to time and again raise this concern in the proper channels like the MOS:films or the Wikiproject films? He/She has failed to do this instead is choosing to edit war. What are your suggestions for this? — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat  ] 06:03, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * My suggestion,, would be not to engage in any edit-warring, but instead to use the WP:Dispute resolution processes, specifically WP:RFC. I hope you come to an amicable resolution, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Dick (slang)
Since you have an interest in slang terms, I thought you might be interested in working this up a bit. Cheers! bd2412 T 19:11, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, I'll try to take a look soon but quite busy lately. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:43, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem. There is, of course, no rush - I plan to peck at it for the next few weeks, and then move it to the mainspace when it is clearly substantial enough to stand there. Cheers again! bd2412  T 17:58, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay,, sounds good. You may enjoy reading my recent quality improvement projects including Fuck (film) and Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:00, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I have read those before, and I have enjoyed them. Actually, I've just expanded and organized my draft some, and I think it is good enough for mainspace now. What do you think? bd2412  T 18:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty good. Some suggestions, take em or leave em: I'd try to incorporate a few more secondary sources, it's a good start, and also expand the WP:LEAD a little bit more. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:57, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I will certainly take 'em! bd2412  T 00:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Great, sounds good, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:19, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I added a quote from the FCC opinion and added some interesting reports about the bowdlerization of spotted dick, and have moved the article to mainspace. Thanks for the advice! bd2412  T 02:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Nice work! I'd recommend standardizing all the citations using WP:CIT and WP:CITE, to increase uniformity throughout. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:24, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Parliamentary Monitoring Services
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Parliamentary Monitoring Services 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 Seabuckthorn -- 21:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing the review, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

New proposals at Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014
Hello. Several new proposals have been submitted at Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014 since you last commented on it. You are invited to return to comment on the new proposals. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Parliamentary Monitoring Services
The article Parliamentary Monitoring Services 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Parliamentary Monitoring Services for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- 03:01, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, will take a look soon and address issues on the subpage. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:24, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Parliamentary Monitoring Services
The article Parliamentary Monitoring Services you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Parliamentary Monitoring Services for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- 05:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles not yet at TFA
Do you know of a good way to see a list of only those FAs that have not already been on TFA? As you can tell, I'm willing to bend that rule if we have to (and have consensus), but obviously, it will be less controversial the closer we stick to status quo. --HectorMoffet (talk) 17:19, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You're a time traveler. It appears you answered my question before I asked it. --HectorMoffet (talk) 17:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Heh, no problems, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:41, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Addition
Do you have a preference among the three 4 FAs that haven't already been at TFA? We definitely want to be able to have a non-repeat option to present to the community-- if you tell me your preferences among them, I'll focus my attentions accordingly. (For that matter, if you have any preferences about the repeated articles, I'd love to hear those too.  Do you think The Wire is the best of the repeat FA options?  (hehe and it's okay if the idea of a re-run is too abhorrent to you to even consider! That's how I feel about the not-even-FA proposals, lol.)     --HectorMoffet (talk) 19:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * In the process of ongoing research on another topic for a quality improvement project on an article. I'll think it over a little bit more. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:33, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

List of notable people under FVEY surveillance
Cirt, thank you so much for helping me out at FLC. I'm currently trying to get the list featured before Feb 11 so that we can use it for our surveillance awareness project. Unfortunately, its my first time making such a nomination so I was not aware about these requirements that have to be met. I personally don't think that its such a big deal, and I believe most of the formatting pointed out by those at FLC could be sorted out within a few minutes. At this point, I just want to make some improvements and see what the rest of the folks think. Many of the failed criteria pointed out ("one of the images fails NFCC criteria.") can be sorted out within seconds. -A1candidate (talk) 19:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds like a good idea, I wish you luck with it! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:28, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bomis
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bomis 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 Seabuckthorn -- 17:31, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Transport articles for review
I will review this articles about transport.
 * 1) Worle railway station
 * 2) Lawrence Hill railway station

Cheers,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Posted Stability reviews and Image reviews for Worle railway station and for Lawrence Hill railway station. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Worle railway station placed as GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Passed Lawrence Hill railway station as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:10, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Passed Worle railway station as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:48, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Forward
I see a lot of FA stars next to your name. Jehochman and others have suggested finding an existing article article and improving it to FA. eg National Security Agency. Do you think it's possible to get an article to FA in the time we have? If so, which article and what needs doing? --HectorMoffet (talk) 02:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * , there is simply not enough time for that. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:53, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's been my thinking as well.  I'm comfortable invoking IAR on what we choose to show on Main-- Main isn't necessarily part of the Encyclopedia.  But rushing a FA process, not so much. --HectorMoffet (talk) 02:57, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for being pessimistic,, it was a nice idea by , but the process is just moving too slowly and I think it's too late at this point. I wish it were going better and more smoothly. I don't know how to help at this point! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:01, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries. I think a lot of people imagine that I "want" Surveillance Awareness Day to occur.   But the truth is that my goal if far simpler:   I want to know what the community thinks about the idea, and then do that.   If consensus won't support something and we wind up doing nothing, that's not a lose, that's entirely a win.
 * In retrospect, I think it was always a little naive for me to expect support from the people typically entrusted to keeping our main page absolutely, positively devoid of advocacy. They're our white blood cells, they're our project's immune system protecting us from a tiny minority hijacking the whole project for the purpose of advocacy.   The people who run mainpage should be the LAST people to sign on to an idea like this-- that's what they're here for-- to protect our project from advocacy without consensus.
 * is makin good progress with the idea of a "Should we do anything special?" RFC.  I'd look to that Guy for how to focus our efforts. --HectorMoffet (talk) 05:54, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, feel free to keep me posted, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Supreme Court of Illinois
You have contacted the right project. Supreme Court of Illinois is too far from Chicago to post your request at WT:CHICAGO. I just don't know how may people are actively watching that project. I don't know when I will next be in Springfield.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know anyone in or from Springfield.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

TFAR
I saw your conversation regarding the rules for TFA requests and was reminded of my old dream. I won't discuss the "points". If you are not afraid of bad company you can post your requests here (insert by wanted date), I will watch and try to do something ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:57, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Gerda Arendt, I'll check it out! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:09, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Chicago Options Associates
Shouldn't Wales' and Davis' articles link to that page?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:42, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Surely Davis should link in. I have not looked at the Wales article to see how it fits, but I imagine it could be properly sourced in a way that it should fit.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Re: Donkey punch thank you
My pleasure. :) QuasyBoy (talk)  01:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bomis
The article Bomis you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bomis for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- 01:12, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:24, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

On a side note, have you ever read Thaddeus Stevens
In the course of looking through articles not yet at TFA, it jumped out at me that Thaddeus Stevens, famous for his role in the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, hasn't been featured yet. The article is really amazing-- I thought I knew a lot about him just from grade school history and the film Lincoln-- I knew he was an incredibly important figure in the abolition of slavery, the US civil war, and the first ever impeachment of a president. but the article is one of those wonderful wikipedia gems where you just start reading and you can't stop. Of course, that article doesn't have anything to do with mass surveillance at all, so, it would have been a lousy choice for Feb 11. But it might be a pretty good choice for Feb 24, the anniversary of the impeachment.

I've never made a TFA nomination, I don't know the secrets of writing a good hook and now's not the time for me to start learning lol. But since you're good at that sort of thing, check out the amazing Mr. Stevens-- love him or hate him, that article should wind up on our mainpage, I think. :) --HectorMoffet (talk) 05:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll look at it. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

RE: Birth of the Federation
Thanks for the reminder, it had fallen off my radar amongst other projects. Fortunatly I don't have anything on right now, so I'll be able to take a look at it immediatly. I'll give archive.org another trawl and I now have both Highbeam and Questia access at the same time, so hopefully there will be further information in there too. Miyagawa (talk) 13:09, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your diligence!

 * Thank you so much,, I really appreciate this! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:40, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Kudos to your gentility!

 * Two in one day,, this is really kind of you! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:40, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * 1a issue: Two in two minutes! --  Seabuckthorn   ♥  09:05, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

One-click archiving
Hi. I really wish you would stop one-click archiving. It needlessly clutters up the talk page history, the archive page history, watchlists, and your contributions. Rather than making two edits to archive a talk page, you're making dozens.

I reverted your edits to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases as there's already an active archive bot managing that page. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi there,, thank you for notifying me of your revert, which I feel was inappropriate. I detailed why, at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_U.S._Supreme_Court_cases. I hope you are well, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:41, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for writing so many wonderful articles
Chinese Wikipedia only has less than 750,000 article, only 244 of them are featured article, 1070 are good article, less than 200 new articles per day.

In my opinion, the best way to improve it, is - and still will be at a least few years - translating English Wikipedia's Featured articles / List and Good articles to Chinese. As for today, I have already doing this for nearly 10 months, translating over 400 articles, 51 of them already become Featured articles, 13 of them already Featured List, 178 are Good articles. Least 3 of them are tranlating from your wonderful work (Everything Tastes Better with Bacon, Chris Field and Freedom for the Thought That We Hate), hope you wouldn't mind I continue to translating your work, thank you so much for writing so many wonderful articles.

Tomorrow will be Chinese New Year, times like this when people in China Mainland seem each other, they will usually say "恭喜发财", means "Congratulation for your big fortune", and more like a blessing for another to get a big fortune next year. So please let me said this 恭喜发财 to you, or maybe I should say: Congratulation for your bigger fortune? :)--Jarodalien (talk) 11:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much,, your comments about my quality improvement projects are most kind! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 12:30, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Engineering and technology reviews
I will review these articles currently nominated at WP:GAN as WP:GA candidates. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Quad Electrostatic Loudspeaker
 * 2) 2013 Rosario gas explosion
 * Update: 2013 Rosario gas explosion on GA Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Quad Electrostatic Loudspeaker placed as GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Passed Quad Electrostatic Loudspeaker as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:21, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Sinclair Scientific - I will review this article. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:01, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Passed Sinclair Scientific as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:45, 22 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Linn Isobarik - I will review this article. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:46, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Posted Stability review and Image review for Linn Isobarik. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Linn Isobarik passed as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:54, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Only one left from above is 2013 Rosario gas explosion. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:24, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Left query with nominator about 2013 Rosario gas explosion. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:42, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Social sciences and society reviews
I will review these articles currently nominated at WP:GAN as WP:GA candidates. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:49, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Losh, Wilson and Bell
 * 2) HubSpot
 * Update: Left some notes for HubSpot, awaiting response there. Performed Stability review and Image review at Losh, Wilson and Bell, awaiting response there as well. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * For HubSpot, Image review and Stability review added. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:10, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Losh, Wilson and Bell, image review and stability review both now completed successfully. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:41, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Passed Losh, Wilson and Bell. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:16, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Closed HubSpot as not GA at this time. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup
I was surprised not to see your name there; signups are still open until the end of the month. I am sure you could breeze through the first two rounds without even breaking a sweat :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:37, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It looks interesting,, but I'd rather just focus on a few quality improvement projects that I've got going on right now. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:36, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The way I look at it is - I am not going to win, but I'll raise the average for the first few rounds. Even if you are not intending to win, seeing how far you can go is fun, and makes the competition more lively (the more, the merrier). Why not try it? :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It just doesn't feel like my sort of thing right now, . I wish you the best of luck, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:21, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

PR
Will do, but I'm just back from India, so it will be a couple of days before I get time  Jimfbleak - </b> talk to me?  06:57, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Hidatsa Dog Dancer
Could you have another look at this? Crisco and I have made an edit. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:30, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, will take a look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:37, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅, revisited my comment there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

4th

 * Thanks for your work on the 4th Amendment.  With a little work, I think it could make it to FA. --HectorMoffet (talk) 07:49, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome,, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:24, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Noel Coward Allan warren edit 1.jpg
I found a problem with this; could you please review and see if you A. agree there's an error, and B. if you do agree, if you find the edit sufficient to fix it? Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:06, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

GA reviews
Hey Cirt, thanks for the reviews! I'm a little busy these few days, but I'll try my best to respond to and make changes regarding the issues you've raised. -- Well-rested Talk  21:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No problems,, like I said, as long as I see you're making some good progress towards good article quality, that's a good thing. Keep me posted, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)