User talk:Cirt/Archive 21

Updated Feature Picture Nomination
Hello, changes has been made at Featured picture candidates/Bixby Creek Bridge, an edited image has been added. Feel free to change your vote. Thank you. Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of ///Euro Car  GT  04:30, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, will take another look, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Invites and advice

 * Thanks for the invite! Definitely up my alley.
 * If you get a chance, you might look over my nominations to DYK, see WikiProject Mass surveillance.  I'm doing my best to submit 100% neutral hooks, but I'm a newbie to mainpage, and need all the oversight I can get.
 * Additionally, I'm looking at putting a lot of time into articles over the next week-- please advise me on where I should focus my efforts! --HectorMoffet (talk) 18:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome,, my pleasure. I don't really participate at DYK anymore these days, but I can take a look at the articles themselves and see if I have any advice for you to help you further along the quality improvement process. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You might especially look at Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution-- it sat at peer review for a while only to be told to take it to FAC, and it now sits a FAC with no feedback so far.  It's subject matter is highly apropos. --HectorMoffet (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay, understood. Will try to find some time to read it over and evaluate soon. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:21, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Re: Successful collaboration on Portal:Star Trek
That's great news, it was a pleasure working with you on it. I'll keep you updated regarding BOTF - I think the only thing it is lacking now is production information. But I've managed to stumble across some extra sources last time I checked, so I'll keep looking. Once the British Library sets up a newspaper reading room (also does magazines) at St Pancras (happening later this year), I'll be able to access all the historical gaming magazines I want and so it'll certainly be expanded then. Miyagawa (talk) 09:52, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/SMS Ägir
I've finished doing a restoration of this; could you please review? Cheers, Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅, thanks for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:47, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Social sciences and society reviews redux
I will review these articles currently nominated at WP:GAN as WP:GA candidates. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Accounting research
 * 2) Voluntary disclosure
 * Update: Image reviews posted to both. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Added Stability review for each. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Passed Accounting research as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Voluntary disclosure placed as GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:39, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles to review for social sciences and society
I will review these articles currently nominated at WP:GAN as WP:GA candidates. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:42, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) The Accounting Review
 * 2) Earnings management
 * Update: Posted Stability review, for both. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Completed Image Review for Earnings management. Image review pending for The Accounting Review. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:59, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Passed Earnings management as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The Accounting Review placed as GA on Hold. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:01, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Passed The Accounting Review as GA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello
Could you please comment on Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Natalia Kills/archive1? Thank you in advance! prism  △  19:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure thing,, was going to get to a buncha list reviews in earnest sometime soon anyways. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

GA review for The Accounting Review and Voluntary disclosure
Hello! I've finished working on the three main issues with The Accounting Review (among other improvements); do let me know if you have any other suggestions on improving the article. I'll get to work on the Voluntary disclosure article soon. Thanks again! -- Well-rested Talk  03:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds good, I'll try to revisit sometime soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:51, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Orlady and GOOD FAITH at DYK
I have, thus far, been submitting articles as DYK with the understanding that a request to "hold" the nomination would result in a hold until the specified date, or later.

Orlady has attempted an end-run around consensus by ignoring the hold date and scheduling a relevant DYK hook ahead of its hold date, undermining the entire good-faith assumptions of DYK.

I respect that consensus for making Feb 11 a 'special day' has not been established, but I am deeply offended by single users in an isolated clique pre-judging Wikipedia consensus, as Orlady had done here.

I'm seeing red--  my initial instinct had been to ignore ALL main page bureaucracy outright, but I was talked into making a good faith submission to the bureaucracy. Now that I see that my olive-branches are being used as kindling to burn bridges built on Consensus, I have a much more cynical view of the half-dozen regulars who think they own mainpage.

Your intervention is most welcome See here--HectorMoffet (talk) 07:16, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry,, but I already told you I'm no longer involved at DYK. Diff. I did, however, look over the articles you were working on at WP:Mass surveillance. Though they all look most interesting, none of them interest me enough at the present time to switch from other ongoing quality improvement projects. I wish you the best of luck, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:22, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

GAR possibly of interest
As someone who took an interest in Featured article candidates/Four Freedoms (Norman Rockwell)/archive2, you may have an interest in Good article reassessment/Freedom from Want (painting)/1‎. Eventually, I plan to pursue a WP:GTC or WP:FTC, but one of the articles in the set is currently controversial.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:31, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification, a bit busy at the moment but will try to have a look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:33, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The oldest discussion in the WP:GAR queue started on November 2 and this one started on January 12. Thus, it will be 10 weeks before this unresolved discussion is as old as the oldest current discussion. I imagine you have some time to get to it, but sooner would be better than later.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Please see Good_article_reassessment/Freedom_from_Want_(painting)/1.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Very helpful, thank you! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 11:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅,, point-by-point WP:WIAGA assessment added. Hopefully this is helpful, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

GA review
Hi, I followed your GA review of The Accounting Review and was happy to see that it made it: it's the very first article on an academic journal reaching this milestone. I have been editing such articles for a long time and never was involved in GA reviews. I always (incorrectly, I see) assumed that an article needed to be quite large in order to stand a chance to get promoted and usually there are not all that many sources about academic journals, so there is not all that much to write. I had a look at Genes, Brain and Behavior and made some moficiations based on advice that you gave for TAR and have now nominated it for GA. I'd appreciate your advice, perhaps if you have time you could review this one, too? Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 10:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your kind words about my review, . Quite busy at the moment with several ongoing quality improvement projects related to the subject of freedom of speech, but will try to take a look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:42, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

List of plantations in West Virginia
Cirt, I've finished addressing your above comments and suggestions. I've removed the dynamic list template from the top of the article, as this is a very comprehensive list completed after extensive research. Should another property that formerly functioned as a plantation be identified, it will be added. I've also removed unnecessary information from the lede, and after some reformatting, I was able to whittle it down from eight to four paragraphs. I've also added a clear template at the end of the "Key" subsection. "See also" has been moved above "References." I added National Register of Historic Places listings in West Virginia to the "See also" section. The references have been reformatted to. I've also added West Virginia Division of Culture and History State Historic Preservation Office to the "External links" section. Thank you again for your very thoughtful and comprehensive review of this list, and please let me know if there are any outstanding issues to be addressed. -- Caponer (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for responding so well to my recommendations. I'll take another look soon, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:46, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Notice of posting to TFA nominations
I've added Fuck (film) to TFA nominations, discussion is at Today's_featured_article/requests. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:34, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

About deletion of: Time Adaptive Self-Organizing Map
I strongly disagree with the deletion of the article. The sole reason given was "google does not find any other". Bad habit. Even more conservative than nepotistic peer reviews. Please enable article again: it is innovative and important. Monnoo (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


 * , assuming you are talking about Time Adaptive Self-Organizing Map which was deleted by Cirt over 3.5 years ago as a result of Articles for deletion/Time Adaptive Self-Organizing Map, I would suggest that the best thing to do is to write a proper draft of an article, showing why it is notable with reference to independent and reliable sources, then submit that draft for review at Articles for Creation mentioning that you need to have it checked to see whether it is sufficiently improved over the previous deleted article to be acceptable. (Administrators can do that, other editors cannot see deleted versions of articles.) I'll leave a welcome on your talk page with more links.  Regards, BencherliteTalk 16:20, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much to for this helpful reply! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:37, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries, as they say. I will revisit the Savage bibliography FLC but it may not be until next week now - a full day of work looms tomorrow and I don't edit at weekends, as Mrs B. and the B'lite-ers for some reason tend to prefer my company. BencherliteTalk 18:27, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll do my best
I'll try to steer clear of any consensus-building discussions-- if our board members can't generate consensus, the proposal deserves to die.

What has really bothered me is the attempt to prejudge consensus. Bencher told me point blank that he OWNs TFA and would veto any mass-surveillance related content, regardless of any consensus that emerged.

When I was nominating content for a potential run on Feb 11, a little voice in the back of my head asked "What is somebody tries to sabotage this initiative by ignoring the hold requests and running content ahead of hold date, just to sabotage the initiative". And I thought "This is Wikipedia, Assume Good Faith-- nobody would be such an ahole as to try to fast-track hooks being held for Feb 11.".

So, yeah, I saw red when people ignored the "please hold for Feb 11 or later"-- a courtesy extended to all nominators. If this was just my hairbrain idea, I'd understand, but the people involved know full well that this is a proposal by our board members, not by me. Attempts to prejudge or sabotage it raise huge red-flags.

When this is all done, there's a great chance that nothing special will happen on Feb 11. That's okay-- this experience taught me that a small group of editors, <6, think they own mainpage, and will prejudge any proposal that questions that ownership.

Feb 11 will come and go, and people like Jimbo and SJ and consensus will decide if we do any special scheduling. But Bench and his clique have a problem-- they've been so threatened by the mere thought of a NOTBUREAUCRACY proposal that we're going to need to seriously evaluate whether the right people are in the right job over at MAIN.

I can accept that I worked on a proposal that failed to achieve consensus, that's fine-- it's a controversial idea, it should be controversial to accept. But several individuals have attempted to mis-use their authority to subvert consensus by claiming veto powers they do not, in fact, have.

If I'm stepping down, I hope you'll step up. My job has been to supply options, not to generate consensus for any one option. If Jimbo and others fail to generate consensus, that's fine. But two or three mainpage apparatchiks are NOT going to veto a decision of this magnitude. --HectorMoffet (talk) 07:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , I accept that you put a good deal of effort into this initiative, and I empathize with your frustration. But like I said before, unfortunately at this point I don't think there is enough time to do anything more for The Day We Fight Back, other than what's already going on. Look on the bright side, you've helped stimulate dialogue across multiple pages, and you've motivated collaborative quality improvement projects on the subject of mass surveillance. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Totally possible. This wasn't my idea, it was Jimbo's--  I just tried to help generate options if a community later concluded it wanted those options, and I probably did a very lousy job of it.
 * But this should not have been so threatening to the insiders who own TFA and Main. This experience has taught me me something very very important about how we pick our featured staff and whether they understand that CONSENSUS is a pillar while BUREAUCRACY is not.  They do not, and we need to fix this in the months to come. --HectorMoffet (talk) 07:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay,, you do raise some good points that at times it feels like there's too much bureaucracy on Wikipedia. But I really do think you could use a break, a breather, something like that. Of course please feel free to keep me posted about future related discussions, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


 * You have to understand my position-- I was always of the opinion this needed a site-wide (or arbcom-wide or board-wide) consensus.   I never claimed the five people who hang out at mainpage had the authority to do a special scheduling of this type, I always felt this should be brought directly to the community at a time of Jimbo or Jehochman's choosing.


 * The five or so members of the mainpage clique claimed they were very offended that I didn't submit my nominations through normal channels, and so I extended an olive branch by crafting pages that would comply with the mainpage criteria and submitting them for nomination through the normal channels, with a perfectly normal hold request.


 * Suddenly I wake up and see that my nominations are being scheduled against my own hold date so they will be unusuable on the hold date they were crafted for, while discussion about the special day is STILL ongoing!!?! How _dare_ someone do that.   This is a debate for hundreds, not for a half dozen.  --HectorMoffet (talk) 09:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , maybe for next time you'll have learned to notify as many noticeboards and central discussion locations as possible. That's a good thing. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I think the real lesson here is that I make a lousy leader and should stay away from proposing anything to anyone, and instead just go write articles. --HectorMoffet (talk) 05:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure, well, working on quality improvement projects on articles related to the topic would also be a good thing. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 11:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

FA on Megadeth

 * Okay, thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:03, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Dear Cirt
I'd like to recreate a page for the band Thoughts of Ionesco; the original appears to have been deleted due to the fact that the band referenced Ionesco in their moniker. They were an established '90s hardcore act that influenced a number of significant bands. Reference: http://www.allmusic.com/artist/thoughts-of-ionesco-mn0002317436

Let me know what I can do...

PE

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Profane Existence (talk • contribs)
 * I replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Dear Cirt
I have a new Thoughts of Ionesco page ready to go... forgive me, I'm new to this... can I show you the page for approval???? Haven't posted it yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profane Existence (talk • contribs) 05:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:29, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Cirt,

The problem is that MTV.com uses content from All Music (as does a number of online sources). The content is, originally, the property of All Music and that is cited in my article.

All Music; http://www.allmusic.com/artist/thoughts-of-ionesco-mn0002317436/biography MTV: http://www.mtv.com/artists/thoughts-of-ionesco/

Can you okay this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profane Existence (talk • contribs) 18:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Fuck peer review, again

 * 1) Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties
 * 2) Wikipedia:Peer review/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1

I've listed the article Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for peer review.

Help with furthering along the quality improvement process would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Dan Savage bibliography for FLC
I've gone ahead and nominated Dan Savage bibliography for WP:FLC consideration, the discussion page is at Featured list candidates/Dan Savage bibliography/archive1. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 12:46, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Dan Savage bibliography
 * 2) Featured list candidates/Dan Savage bibliography/archive1

Barnstar

 * Thank you,, this is most appreciated! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks very much,, most appreciated! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Fuck (film)
This is a note to let the main editors of Fuck (film) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 1, 2014. 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/March 1, 2014. 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:

Fuck is a 2005 American documentary film by director Steve Anderson, which argues that the word is key to discussions about freedom of speech and censorship. The film provides perspectives from art, linguistics, society and comedy. Linguist Reinhold Albert Aman, journalism analyst David Shaw, language professor Geoffrey Nunberg and Oxford English Dictionary editor Jesse Sheidlower explain the term's history and evolution. The film features the last interview of author Hunter S. Thompson before his suicide. It was first shown at the AFI Film Festival at ArcLight Hollywood; it has subsequently been released on DVD in America and in the UK and used as a resource on several university courses. The New York Times critic A. O. Scott called the film a battle between advocates of morality and supporters of freedom of expression, while other reviews criticized its length and repetitiveness. Law professor Christopher M. Fairman commented on the film's importance in his 2009 book on the same subject. The American Film Institute said, "Ultimately, [it] is a movie about free speech ... Freedom of expression must extend to words that offend." UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

 * Thank you, looks tasty! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Fuck
I'm pleased to see Fuck made it to the front page. Good work. I thought of you just now and wanted to thank you again for Freedom for the Thought That We Hate, which prompted me to read the excellent book. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 02:33, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Many thanks,, your words are most kind! I'm so glad you were well-served by your education from reading Freedom for the Thought That We Hate, I also found it to be a most inspiring and informative work. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:39, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Michael J. Wagner
Hi-In 2009, you deleted an article about a motivational speaker and writer named Michael J. Wagner. This morning I started an article about a Maryland state legislator whose name was also Michael J. Wagner who died on February 13, 2014 and who was notable. I hope there will be no problems-thanks-RFD (talk) 12:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm no longer an admin, I'll respectfully defer to the judgment of other admins. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 12:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Cirt, can we please talk?
Cirt, every time I make any edit to 29th Golden Raspberry Awards, you take issue with that. That is one thing, but afterwards, you decide to track down almost every edit I have made and revert without thinking if they were actually bad edits or not. I feel that this just an unhealthy way of dealing with the problem.

What my main point is: could we please just talk about it? I promise, I will never make any edit to 29th Golden Raspberry Awards without your consent, but please try to be a little more rational about this. Not everything is black and white. We can talk it out, it will work. Defender miz (talk) 13:11, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , you have a history of making completely unsourced changes to article pages, over a sustained period of time, including wholly unreferenced additions to WP:BLPs. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:23, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , okay, I will make sources for them in the future. I am sorry. Defender miz (talk) 17:31, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , we also discussed your prior disruptive changes to Golden Raspberry Award pages, including an WP:FL quality page, and yet you do so again without consensus, repeatedly over time. This needs to stop. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , okay, I will. I just thought the changes would not be a problem. I saw of pages of the Golden Raspberry Awards add in the roles they played, so I thought it was okay. But may I request one change? Defender miz (talk) 17:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , you can post further suggestions to the talk pages of the relevant articles, please. But yes, your changes in the recent past were disruptive, and seemed to have been similar changes by other IPs and sockpuppets of apparently another sockmaster which we unfortunately had to deal with in the past. But the Wikipedia pages about the Golden Raspberry Awards do not need to look like the same pages at the Razzie website. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , okay, my suggestion will be on the talk page of the 29th Golden Raspberry Awards. Defender miz (talk) 17:42, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Not in Front of the Children
I've recently gone ahead and created an article about the book, Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth.
 * Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth

Help with suggestions for additional secondary sources would be appreciated at the article's talk page, at Talk:Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:25, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Genocide definitions, Definitions of pogrom and Definitions of fascism for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Genocide definitions, Definitions of pogrom and Definitions of fascism are 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/Genocide definitions 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. Oncenawhile (talk) 09:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

The Houstonian
I've recently gone ahead and created an article about the newspaper, The Houstonian (newspaper).
 * The Houstonian (newspaper)

Help with suggestions for additional secondary sources would be appreciated at the article's talk page, at Talk:The Houstonian (newspaper).

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:31, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive
It's that time again! Starting on March 1, there will be another GAN Backlog Drive! There will be several changes compared to previous drives:


 * This drive will introduce a new component to it; a point system. In a nutshell, older nominations are worth more points than newer nominations. The top 3 participants who have the points will be awarded the Golden, Silver, or Bronze Wikipedia Puzzle Piece Trophy, respectively.
 * Unlike the December 2013 Backlog Drive, earning an additional barnstar if you reached your goal has been removed.
 * The allowance to have insufficient reviews has been lowered to 2 before being disqualified.
 * An exception to the rule that all reviews must be completed before the deadline has been created.

Also, something that I thought I would share with all of you is that we raised $20.88 (USD) for the WMF in the December 2013 drive. It may not sound like a lot but considering that that was raised just because we reviewed articles, I would say that's pretty good! With that success, pledges can be made for the upcoming drive if you wish.

More info regarding the drive and full descriptions regarding the changes to this drive can be found on the the drive page. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the drive talk page.

I look forward to your participation and hope that because of it, some day the backlog will be gone!

--Dom497

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
I've recently created the page List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!.

Additional help with research, secondary source suggestions, and quality improvement ideas would be appreciated, at Talk:List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay, so let me get this straight
Cirt, if one Wikipedia article has certain information, couldn't that same information be used in another article? I guess that's a no, due to recent events. I am a little surprised that you considered my edit on Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Director to be "vandalism" when it was already confirmed on 34th Golden Raspberry Awards. Yes, this time I made sure to do it in the way you consider the correct way, but I am still confused here. Please explain this to me. Thank you. Defender miz (talk) 03:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * No,, just because unsourced info is on another Wikipedia page, does not make it okay to add unreferenced info to a different Wikipedia page. Please read WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:CITE. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I understand now. I am sorry for making the commotion. Defender miz (talk) 03:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * So, you won't add unsourced info to pages again? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:30, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll make sure of it. Defender miz (talk) 03:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Bomis

 * Thanks very much,, much appreciated! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

The ALA RFC
I was still getting useful feedback pretty late today ... do you think it's ready to be put up for a vote, or does it need more thought? Thanks. Wnt (talk) 06:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi ... I had another idea I was thinking of, which I think should be handled separately from the RFC, not entirely sure. Right now, the "WP:NOTCENSORED" principle we know and love is a tiny blurb shoved into a grab-bag collection of stuff that Wikipedia isn't. But the ALA has this gorgeous Library Bill of Rights that reads like just what the doctor ordered. I'm thinking there ought to be some way to put up as a policy proposal to ratify it, or perhaps some minimally reworked version replacing "libraries" with "Wikipedia". As far as I'm concerned it ought to be one of the Pillars of Wikipedia. What do you think? Wnt (talk) 21:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Chicago Options Associates

 * Thanks very much, ! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Question about book articles
Hi. I notice Freedom for the Thought That We Hate has a blue title and mine is black. What's that about? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:21, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Not sure, might be your browser preference settings. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah. When I temporarily added a WikiProject Medicine template to the talk page my title turned green - so your blue must be down to one of your talk page templates. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 15:30, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Huh, curious, okay. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

List of colleges and universities in Delaware
Cirt, thank you for your thoughtful review of the List of colleges and universities in Washington, D.C. I noticed that you have also reviewed and provided guidance to the List of colleges and universities in West Virginia. If you have a moment, could you please provide guidance for the List of colleges and universities in Delaware, also listed on the FL nominations page. I've found your reviews very helpful in expanding and improving the quality of my nominated lists. Thanks again! -- Caponer (talk) 01:53, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your kind comments about my reviews,, much appreciated! I revisited the one, and I'll try to go through FLC to get to the other one soon. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

FLC hats
That's fine, go for it. -- Pres N  21:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and ✅. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Free Expression Policy Project
I've created an article on the organization Free Expression Policy Project.

Suggestions for additional secondary sources would be most appreciated, at Talk:Free Expression Policy Project.

Cheers,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Heshmat
Please undelete Ebrahim Heshmat. I will add references to it. ,dgjdksvc&#59;jknhg (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:15, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priscilla's Model Management
This article was deleted years ago for only having marginal notability at the time, and based on my research the agency appears to have increased coverage by RS since then and I am requesting the article be restored to WT:Articles for creation/Priscilla's Model Management so that it may be expanded. Thank you. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 14:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:36, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

GAN March 2014 Backlog Drive
The March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on April 1, 2014! Sent by Dom497 on behalf of MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Article title
Hi Cirt,

Congratulations on once again making the main page! Have you considered moving the article to Fuck (2005 film) in order to differentiate it from Fuck (1969 film)? That move would then allow the hatnote to be removed. Let me know what you think. I hope life has been going well with you lately.

Neelix (talk) 05:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for precious perspectives from art, linguistics and society! (I don't think a move is needed to differentiate from a redirect. In any case, don't move for the next three days.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind words, . I'd agree with, I'd very much rather not move the page at all. Especially as the other article of the 1969 film is more known by its current title location anyways, Blue Movie, including for example its movie promotion poster. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Deletion review for Priscilla&
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Priscilla&. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 19:25, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅, commented at Deletion review/Log/2014 March 2. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Free Expression Policy Project
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Free Expression Policy Project 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 -- 21:33, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , thanks for reviewing another of my quality improvement projects to improve articles on Wikipedia related to freedom of speech and censorship, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Wow! From an acorn I founded in 2008 as a redirect for Heins' work to GA -- truly, no good deed goes unpunished (for too long).  WurmWoode  T   08:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 09:58, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Free Expression Policy Project
The article Free Expression Policy Project you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Free Expression Policy Project for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- 21:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, thanks for reviewing another of my quality improvement projects related to the subjects of freedom of speech and censorship, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency
I've created a new article about the Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Suggestions for additional secondary sources would be appreciated, at Talk:Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

2002 Oscars
Hi Cirt,

I read your comments regarding the 70th Academy Awards for featured list promotion and have made corrections and replies to them at the WP:FLC forum. Thanks.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 23:07, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

An RfC that you may be interested in...
As one of the previous contributors to Infobox film or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!
 * This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 18:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks very muhc,, I'll take a look, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:39, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

FLC
Hey Cirt! Could you please leave some comments on Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Sophie Ellis-Bextor/archive1? I worked really hard on it and I was hoping it would get some recognition. Thank you! Prism  △  17:43, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Got a few quality improvement projects going on at the moment, but will see if I can take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth 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 Caponer -- 04:32, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Cirt, I've completed my review of the article and my comments can be found at Talk:Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth/GA1. I commend you on a job well done! I just had two comments/suggestions. Please let me know if you have any of your own comments or concerns regarding this review. -- Caponer (talk) 05:06, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, for the review. I'll respond to your comments soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Cirt, job well done! I've passed this article to GA status and made the necessary updates to reflect this. It was a privilege and a pleasure reviewing your article, and again, I commend your extraordinary efforts. -- Caponer (talk) 11:11, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

GA nomination for Not in Front of the Children
I've nominated the article on the book Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth for WP:GA candidacy.

Cheers,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:03, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Just checking for additional comments
Per the suggestion from Aureez at FLC Audie Murphy honors and awards, just checking with all previous reviewers to see if there are any other comments. Thank you for what you have already input there. — Maile (talk) 12:28, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, will take another look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:05, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth
The article Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth for comments about the article. Well done! -- Caponer (talk) 11:11, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, for your GA Review and your kind comments about my quality improvement efforts on the subjects of freedom of speech and censorship. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 11:12, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

WP History in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject History 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. –Mabeenot (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, but I'm more focused on WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech these days. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:15, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for Featured Article
I've nominated Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for Featured Article candidacy.

Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 9 March 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, I'll look in next few days  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:12, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, most appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:15, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The bad news is that the nightjar is flying  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  15:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah okay,, I shall take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:19, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No, go ahead. Take that as covering any future FACs too  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  17:20, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

need help
Here's the thing, usually I'm working on Chinese wikipedia, so I'm not quite familiar about the procedure here. I want to nominate an article (Paul Kane) for FAR, at first someone told me that I can't do it right now, like it need to be informed first at the talk page, and he did it for me, but now there's two weeks passed, still no improvement in the article, what should I do next? My English is not very good, hope I express nothing inappropriate. Thanks.--Jarodalien (talk) 09:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Nimrod programming language
Hello. My name is Jason Livesay. You previously deleted the article on the excellent Nimrod programming language. Since that time, the Nimrod community has grown, the language and tools have gotten more mature, and the notability of this language is now undeniable.

In fact, after researching new systems programming languages over the last month, I have come to the conclusion that Nimrod is objectively superior to Go, Rust, D and Julia as a general purpose systems and application programming language, as it has superior performance, syntax, and metaprogramming capabilities when compared to any of those languages. However, it is not quite as popular as those languages. One of the reasons for that is the deletion of the Wikipedia article.

The latest discussion on Hacker News: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7388014

There is a large community on irc on freenode as well as a busy forum, a home page, a manual, etc. Not only is this a "real" and notable programming language, it is amazing that it has not been recognized as such by the Wikipedia editors. Perhaps this is simply due to a lack of depth of understanding of high technology that is causing this inability to recognize Nimrod.

Please see the following article which has been prepared by a core Nimrod developer (who doesn't actually know me or know that I am advocating for his article) and includes numerous references:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dom96/sandbox

Ithkuil (talk) 07:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:27, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

List peer review for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
I've started a list peer review for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, feedback to further along the quality improvement process would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia:Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1

2014 Oscars
Hi Cirt,

Next week I am on spring break, and I plan on doing major cleanup for 86th Academy Awards article. However, I am worried that someone will try to reverse my edits or add unnecessary and questionable content while I make the changes (given that the ceremony has only occurred a little over a week ago). I do not want to be accused of vandalism or starting an edit war. I actually plan to submit the list for featured list promotion around August 1 (roughly the time of the 66th Emmy Awards on Aug 25 when we'll see what awards it will win). Can you do a quicky glance at the list and help me with suggestions on what belongs or not and how I can prevent unpleasant edit wars. Thank you for your help in contributing to the protection of Featured list.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:11, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Problems with edits?
Hi, a question re Requests for comment/QuackGuru2: You endorsed jps' outside view, which said, among other things, that Wikipedia "would be better off if the two editors endorsing the RfC were banned from these topics" (said topics, I assume, being the areas where QG's conduct is indicted in the RfC; it's unclear). AFAIK, I've had virtually no interaction with you, but assume you must have reviewed my edits (and block log etc.), and those of (the other RfC endorser), or you wouldn't have endorsed such a strong statement. Apart from whatever objections you have to the RfC itself, can you explain why you believe Mallexikon and myself deserve to be topic-banned, and from which topics particularly? What have we done that's that bad? Maybe you can show me a couple diffs that are representative of whatever ongoing problems there are. I'd appreciate the feedback; I'm pretty sure Mallexikon would too! Thanks. --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI) 10:00, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:10, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * More useful info here. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

re: re Problems with edits?

 * (only asking again because... per below. -- Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI) 12:14, 15 March 2014 (UTC) )

Hi, a question re Requests for comment/QuackGuru2: You endorsed jps' outside view, which said, among other things, that Wikipedia "would be better off if the two editors endorsing the RfC were banned from these topics" (said topics, I assume, being the areas where QG's conduct is indicted in the RfC; it's unclear). AFAIK, I've had virtually no interaction with you, but assume you must have reviewed my edits (and block log etc.), and those of (the other RfC endorser), or you wouldn't have endorsed such a strong statement. Apart from whatever objections you have to the RfC itself, can you explain why you believe Mallexikon and myself deserve to be topic-banned, and from which topics particularly? What have we done that's that bad? Maybe you can show me a couple diffs that are representative of whatever ongoing problems there are. I'd appreciate the feedback; I'm pretty sure Mallexikon would too! Thanks. --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI) 10:00, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I'd rather not get into it more than what's already been said there. These days I'm more focused on quality improvement projects getting articles to WP:FA. I wish you all the best of luck in resolving your disputes with each other. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:10, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Cirt, I'm not posting again frivolously; I very much respect WP:TPG.  But your answer isn't clear at all: You referred to the RfC, but my questions simply aren't addressed there or at its talk page.  So I have no idea what your reasoning was, and I think I (and Mallexikon) deserve to know.  A topic ban (and I still don't know which topic) is a serious matter.
 * If, by chance -- and I'm just guessing -- you support other aspects of jps's comment but can't really justify the the topic ban part, I (a) understand, and (b) would ask that you revise your support. It's easy:  just write another outside view duplicating only the parts of jps's that you agree with.  Thanks! --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI) 15:48, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I also agree with all of the comments by, here, and at the RFC, itself. That is all. I wish you the best if you are genuinely interested in quality improvement projects on Wikipedia to bring articles to WP:GA and WP:FA. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Adding questionable/unsourced content to 74rh Oscars
Sorry to bother, but MasonBanks keeps adding an fact that seems to be of original research and does not have any proper source explicitly say so. The fact says this:

This was at the expense of Russell Crowe, who became the only person in history to win the Golden Globe, BAFTA, SAG Award and Critics Choice Award for Best Actor but lose the Oscar to another performance.

While it is true off the bat, there is no proper resource explaining the fact specifically. Can you please tell him to stop.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 22:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:39, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for Featured Article
I've nominated Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for Featured Article candidacy.

Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:32, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the help last time
Thanks for the help last time, the main editor has reply today. And base on his (her?) reply, what's should I do next?

BTW, 1984年罗杰尼希教生物恐怖攻击 translating form your amazing Featured article 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack, now is also a Featured article at Chinese Wikipedia, thanks for your encourage and patient.--Jarodalien (talk) 07:22, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 09:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Created new article = Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars

 * Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars

I've created a new article on the book, Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars.

Help with researching additional secondary sources would be appreciated, at Talk:Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 08:57, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:49, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Another barnstar for you!

 * Thanks very much,, I'm so glad you appreciate my quality improvement efforts on topics related to freedom of speech and censorship. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:17, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties promoted to Featured Article
Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties was promoted to Featured Article quality.

Thank you very much to all who helped with this successful quality improvement project related to freedom of speech and censorship,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:34, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Congrats, another good one. Distantly related: could you have a look at this DYK nom? - Not really related: do you still plan to nominate Thaddeus Stevens for TFA? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:34, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Will reply soon at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:16, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations!♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:16, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Nominated Thaddeus Stevens for Today's Featured Article
I've nominated quality improvement project by, article on deceased politician Thaddeus Stevens, for consideration as Today's Featured Article.

Discussion is at WP:TFAR.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:11, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties
Hi Cirt! Just to inform you that a user in the Chinese Wikipedia (Jarodalien) have translated the abovementioned article into Chinese, and there will be a high chance that it will be promoted to FA status. The user is well respected in the Chinese Wikipedia and have translated many types of articles, with 82 FAs, 19 FLs and 181 GAs.

This should be good news to you! HYH.124 (talk) 14:57, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the notification,, this is most amazing news! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

By the way, as I am more active in contributing and improving Chinese Wikipedia procedures (as seen in Special:CentralAuth/HYH.124, where I had more edits on zhwiki), I met the same problem as Jarodalien too when submitting FARs (See Featured article review/Opera (web browser)/archive1 and Talk:Opera (web browser)). As you can see, most of my edits to the wiki is to the project namespaces, while my edits to articles are only 29%, while my edits to English articles comprises 58.32%. I guess, sad life, I had to come here more often to familiarise with the English Wikipedia... HYH.124 (talk) 15:32, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, understood, once you get more familiar with things it tends to get easier. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that quite a number of articles you wrote was translated by the abovementioned user. It seems like you are rather influential. Keep up the good job. HYH.124 (talk) 16:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! Yes, I'm most appreciative of the translation efforts of my quality improvement projects. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:09, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency 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 -- 23:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration Amendment Request
I made an Arbitration Amendment Request, at Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment.

Cheers,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:43, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the thanks. That was very good of you. Thmazing (talk) 01:27, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:10, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of international cricket centuries by Virat Kohli/archive1
Hi, since you commented on my previous nomination (a cricket list) would you be interested in reviewing this one too? &mdash; Vensatry (Ping) 07:44, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll try to take a look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 11:03, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

FL review
Hey, I wanted to touch base with you regarding my latest FL nomination at Featured list candidates/List of plantations in West Virginia/archive2. You had previously reviewed my nomination and supported it for FL status (see archive1). I was forced to withdraw the nomination on account of having too many nominations on the page at the same time. If it wouldn't be any trouble, could you please re-review the list and voice your comments and concerns at the new review page? Thanks again for your continued quality contributions to Wikipedia! -- Caponer (talk) 03:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll try to take a look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:10, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

John C. Davis
Since you created the article John C. Davis, I wanted to ask whether this was a misidentification. The only source given in this article refers to Rennie Davis as the "son of President Truman's chief of staff of the Council of Economic Advisers", but does not mention the name "John C. Davis". Where is this name coming from? I wonder if this was a misidentification with Joseph S. Davis, who served on the Council of Economic Advisers 1955–58. However, I could not find a connection between this person and Rennie Davis. Maybe you can help. --bender235 (talk) 12:07, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:18, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note to self: Additional info at Articles for deletion/John C. Davis. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:31, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

New article = Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence

 * Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence

I've created a new article on the book, Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence.

Help with researching additional secondary sources would be appreciated, at Talk:Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration motion
An arbitration motion has been proposed regarding you at Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. Your comments are welcome. --Rschen7754 18:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:10, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Cirt and Jayen466 Amendment Request
Your amendment request regarding the Cirt and Jayen466 case has been closed and archived. You can view the archived request [//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cirt_and_Jayen466#Request_for_amendment_.28March_2014.29 here]. For the Arbitration Committee, Rockfang (talk) 17:57, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of international cricket centuries by Virat Kohli/archive1
Responded there &mdash; Vensatry (Ping) 14:31, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Responded there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Unclosed FLC pages
Hi Cirt,

I noticed that the 1994 Oscars FLC submission page has not been properly closed even though the list has been promoted to FL status and has been featured on the main page as TFL on March 2/3, 2014. Also the 1998 Oscars FLC submission page has not been properly closed even though it too has been promoted. And the talk page has not been updated. Where can I report this problem here on Wikipedia? Thanks.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 17:04, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Suggest you raise this at WT:FLC. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Finder-Spyder: restarted article
I restarted Finder-Spyder, which was deleted in 2010. Your name is on the tag so I'm letting you know. --Tsavage (talk) 14:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

2014 Oscars list keep or remove
Hi Cirt,

Since I was not able to get a temporary lock for the 86th Academy Awards, I am fixing the list via a sandbox. Since you have had a lot of experience of what is (or at least appears to be) encyclopedic, I have three things to ask:


 * Should Ellen's Oscar super selfie be mentioned per se Featured List standards? Like the 61st Academy Awards which does mention the Rob Lowe/Snow White opening number, the selfie was one of the most standout moments of the ceremony. In my opinion, I would keep it since there is no other alternate venue to mention it.


 * Should the John Travolta's mispronunciation of Idina Menzel's name (as Adele Dazeem) be mentioned likewise for FL standards? In my opinion, I find that this bit of information more suitable for Indina Menzel's page rather than the ceremony itself.


 * Should the table list the multiple nominations and awards FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL PERSON be removed? I can find various sources listing the multiple nominations and wins by FILM and STUDIO (such as here, here, and here), but not by person.

BTW, the revoked nomination controversy will be relegated as a footnote at the end of the list.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:12, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Another essay attempt...
This may not go well, but I thought I might as well try writing up WP:Internet Employees' Bill of Rights as a general idea, expressing some statements that I've made in recent cases, and in response to the absolutely appalling precedent of Brendan Eich being forced to resign from Mozilla (no, I'm not a section 8 fan, but to me that just isn't the point). Do you think anything good can come of it? Wnt (talk) 02:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:22, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Belated thanks
I know this is terribly late but I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your participation at my RfA. While you did not support my nomination, I still appreciated your thoughtful participation in the process. I look forward to the opportunity to work together in the days to come. Best wishes, -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 19:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:23, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Image review
Hi, Cirt

How do I do an image review? I would like to know so that I could assist in helping 1st Magritte Awards to FLC status?
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied at user's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:29, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Mail
-  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 01:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars 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 Caponer -- 12:31, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for doing the review, most appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:44, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I've completed my thorough review and I've left my comments and suggestions at Talk:Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars/GA1. As I stated on the review page Cirt, please do not take my brevity as an indicator of a lack of thorough review and instead, take it is an indicator of your exceptional authorship! -- Caponer (talk) 01:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll take a look and get back to you. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:19, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014 FL Thanks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Dan Savage bibliography. .--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:39, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:19, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency 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 Diannaa -- Diannaa (talk) 00:31, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking on this review! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars
The article Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 01:31, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Once again Cirt, thank you for the tremendous opportunity to review this incredible article. I enjoy keeping up with your latest contributions to Wikipedia, and look forward to reviewing another of your extraordinary articles in the future! -- Caponer (talk) 01:33, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, for your kind words about my quality improvement projects related to freedom of speech and censorship, most appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency
The article Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Diannaa -- Diannaa (talk) 16:01, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, for this review, most appreciated. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:54, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Cutting the Mustard for GA
I've put up Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence for GA consideration.

Still in the process of additional ongoing research for secondary source discussion, but it's ready at this point to join the queue. :)

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:17, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence 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 Tezero -- Tezero (talk) 17:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for taking on the review. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:00, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Featured List nomination for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
I've started a Featured List nomination for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!.
 * 1) List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
 * 2) Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1

Participation would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:28, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

WP Law in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Law 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. –Mabeenot (talk) 03:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure,, I'll look it over and see what I can come up with. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:49, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry didn't get to this one in time for multiple issues. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence
The article Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence 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:Cutting the Mustard: Affirmative Action and the Nature of Excellence for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tezero -- Tezero (talk) 17:31, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, I won't have much computer access for the next few days, please allow me a little more time and I'd like very much to address your most helpful recommendations. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:01, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Request GA nomination of Chiropractic
I am interested in bringing the chiropractic page up to GA status. I'm not sure what the first step is. Your help would be greatly appreciated. QuackGuru ( talk ) 20:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Can you restore the Ellie Ga article?
She seems to have garnered some notability since the deletion in late 2009, and I'll edit the article further once it's restored to incorporate these sources: Thanks for your consideration. -- Brainy J  ~ ✿ ~ ( talk ) 19:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * http://galleristny.com/2013/02/art-of-darkness-ellie-gas-north-pole-tell-all/
 * http://theamericanreader.com/submerged-ruins-an-interview-with-ellie-ga-visual-artist/
 * http://kcur.org/post/ellie-ga-searching-ancient-light
 * http://www.timeout.com/newyork/art/ellie-ga-four-thousand-blocks
 * http://www.newyorker.com/arts/events/art/ellie-ga-bureau
 * http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/2011/03/31/ellie_ga_an_artist_adrift.html
 * http://makemag.com/review-classification-of-a-spit-stain/

Note to self: Discussion of unilateral page moves
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_%28books%29&oldid=605418340#WP:SUBTITLE_vs._WP:NATURAL

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Good_Olfactory&oldid=605418445#Moving_pages

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Deletion review for Ellie Ga
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ellie Ga. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Brainy J ~ ✿ ~ ( talk ) 16:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you, commented there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:53, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Re: the book
Hello. Sure i do. She is the user Rahma Elkady. I'm not sure if she is still participating on Arabic Wikipedia, she was a student and a member in the education program of Egypt, and her final edit was on April 4, 2014. However, user Samir I. Sharbaty (Coordinator of the Arab world education program in Egypt) might be able to contact her. Note that he also helped in correcting and editing the article--باسم (talk) 17:03, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure thing :-)--باسم (talk) 17:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Not in Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth

 * Thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Captions
click here and you can fix the typos :) just don't change the timecodeVictor Grigas (talk) 14:09, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I think I've got it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks both very much for the help! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:34, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cutting the Mustard (book)
The article Cutting the Mustard (book) 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:Cutting the Mustard (book) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tezero -- Tezero (talk) 14:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The Boston Globe
Hi, Cirt. I saw this today. Do you think it is worth listing with the other headlines you've linked at Adrianne's user talk page? Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 16:34, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes,, but I already added it at User_talk:Wadewitz. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:22, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I obviously did not scroll down far enough. :) Thanks! Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 01:18, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:28, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Too many copy edit requests on the GOCE Requests page (new limit)
As of March 16, the Guild of Copy Editors has implemented a new limit of two (2) copy edit requests at a time for any one editor on the Requests page. You recently posted a third request. Can you please remove it and wait until one of your other requests is done before posting a new one?

Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience. (Also, please let me know if I am in error with this message.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:35, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Jonesey, I've removed your request for Parliamentary Monitoring Services. Feel free to re-add the request once one of your current requests has been dealt with. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:43, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and, I wasn't aware of the new limit. I'll make sure not to have more than two (2) requests in the future. Thanks very much for all you do for the Guild of Copy Editors ! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 09:29, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

The Impact of Wikipedia by Adrianne Wadewitz



 * File:The Impact of Wikipedia Adrianne Wadewitz.webm by
 * 1) Featured picture candidates/The Impact of Wikipedia by Adrianne Wadewitz

I've nominated the video file File:The Impact of Wikipedia Adrianne Wadewitz.webm by for Featured Picture candidacy.

The discussion is at Featured picture candidates/The Impact of Wikipedia by Adrianne Wadewitz.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:26, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/The Impact of Wikipedia by Adrianne Wadewitz

 * Thanks very much,, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:30, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Skepchickal



 * File:Wikimania 2012 portrait 102 by ragesoss, 2012-07-13.JPG
 * 1) Featured picture candidates/Skepchickal

I've nominated this photograph by, for Featured Picture consideration.

Discussion is at Featured picture candidates/Skepchickal.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

RE: Ali's Smile
Hello Cirt. I was wondering if you'd be interested in making a FA nomination for Ali's Smile: Naked Scientology? Three years ago I proposed some edits to this article which could not justify inclusion; the article seems extremely solid to me anyway. The last edit was by Dr. Wadewitz, whom I was very sad to learn about the passing away of. As she worked on it along with yourself it could be a fitting tribute for it to reach FA status and I would happily conominate it with you or at least support the nomination and help to make any necessary improvements. JJARichardson (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * , unfortunately I cannot participate in your suggested WP:FA quality improvement project, due to Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cirt_and_Jayen466. I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors. I'll also respectfully defer to the comments by at that article's talk page. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:31, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Islands
I happened upon this portal and it was mostly blank. I have added some content, but it needs major expansion. As per your interest in portals, care to collaborate to improve it? Cheers, NorthAmerica1000 20:58, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for thinking of me, . At the moment I'm mostly busy with several quality improvement projects related to freedom of speech and censorship. I'll take a look at the portal soon, but no promises immediately. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:31, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I've seen your quality portal work before and also remember you from the featured portal nomination process. Since you're well-accustomed to portal work, it seemed natural to bring this one to your attention. Thanks for keeping the Islands portal in mind for potential future improvements. NorthAmerica1000 19:09, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, will keep it in mind for sure. :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:31, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Harold Goldstein (psychologist, mental health)


The article Harold Goldstein (psychologist, mental health) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of notability. His various positions do not make him notable. I could find no outside coverage about him at all; fails WP:GNG. On a Google Scholar search he fails WP:ACADEMIC.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MelanieN (talk) 21:22, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll take no action here,, and respectfully defer to community processes. Thank you for the notification, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:13, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello Cirt
Hello Cirt,

I'm writing in response to your message posted below. My changes were constructive, since I was making a change to the date. I must have, by mistake, posted the wrong date for the edit-a-thon that was in tribute to Adrianne. My class had been reading her work all semester and the event was planned before her death. However, given how shocked the students were at her passing, they dedicated the event to her and her work. I would appreciate if you would change it back to the correct date of April 16th, 2014. I don't know how you made judgements on what is constructive or not, but I think that, in this case, you were mistaken in your edit.

Cheers, Simone Browne

Hello, I'm Cirt. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! — Cirt (talk) 18:33, 20 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.240.255 (talk)
 * Ah, I see, my apologies for the misunderstanding. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:13, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Fuck
I read somewhere in one of the articles that "fuck" wasn't said in a mainstream film until MASH (film) or something but I'm watching Wages of Fear from 1953 at the moment and at least in the subtitle translation one of them says something about the "fucking engine blowing up". ♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:43, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps or  know more about it.♦  Dr. Blofeld  14:45, 24 May 2014 (UTC) I suppose The Wages of Fear doesn't quality as a major studio film then.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:12, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi there,, thanks for your interest in my quality improvement work!
 * This info is already cited to two (2) secondary sources in the WP:FA article, Fuck (film).
 * "The first major studio-released film to use the word was Robert Altman's "MASH," in 1970."
 * Hopefully that is helpful, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:07, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hopefully that is helpful, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:07, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah,, that was what I was thinking as well. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Either that or the translator added it instead of a minor French expletive! It's a great film BTW tension throughout as they're driving trucks full of explosives through winding mountain roads! ♦  Dr. Blofeld
 * Ah, fascinating, thank you! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:15, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Tools
Hi, yesterday you asked me a question regarding my archiving. The only tool I use when it comes to it, is "patience". I think it wont take too long for you to find it. --Mishae (talk) 15:54, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay, thanks very much! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:54, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/The Art of Painting
There are two alternative versions in this nomination, and it's not clear which one should be promoted. Could specify, which one you support. Armbrust The Homunculus 23:14, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Wadewitz listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wadewitz. Since you had some involvement with the Wadewitz redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Beerest 2 Talk page 12:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I see the discussion is closed, and I've got no objections to its end result. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chicago Options Associates
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chicago Options Associates 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 Beagel -- Beagel (talk) 17:01, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much,, for doing the review. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:16, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chicago Options Associates
The article Chicago Options Associates 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:Chicago Options Associates for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Beagel -- Beagel (talk) 18:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, will get on this soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chicago Options Associates
The article Chicago Options Associates you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chicago Options Associates for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Beagel -- Beagel (talk) 18:21, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Cutting the Mustard (book)

 * Thanks very much,, much appreciated! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 08:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Award 4 U
Awarded to Cirt thanking him for working in a cooperative and peaceful fashion. Onel5969 (talk) 16:57, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, this is a surprise and most appreciated! &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Adrianne Wadewitz for Peer review

 * 1) Adrianne Wadewitz
 * 2) Peer review/Adrianne Wadewitz/archive1

I've nominated the article Adrianne Wadewitz for Peer review.

Discussion is at the peer review subpage, at Peer review/Adrianne Wadewitz/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:02, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Children's literature for Featured Portal candidacy

 * 1) Portal:Children's literature
 * 2) Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Children's literature

I've nominated Portal:Children's literature to be considered for Featured Portal quality.

This was a joint quality improvement collaboration between myself and User:Wadewitz.

Participation would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Children's literature.

Thank you for your time,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:21, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

FL review
, since you have conducted very thorough and helpful reviews of some of my past FL candidates, I was wondering if you would be able to provide me with additional guidance in your free time at Featured list candidates/List of colleges and universities in Delaware/archive2. I value your suggestions, and feel your eye for detail would greatly improve the overall quality of List of colleges and universities in Delaware. Thank you! -- Caponer (talk) 11:51, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay,, I'll try to take a look soon. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 14:43, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Possible quality improvement projects
Just some possible ideas, placing here for now. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Portal:Children's literature
 * 2) Climbing Free, by Lynn Hill
 * 3) High Infatuation: A Climber's Guide to Love and Gravity, by Steph Davis
 * 4) Learning to Fly: An Uncommon Memoir of Human Flight, Unexpected Love, and One Amazing Dog, by Steph Davis
 * 5) Ultrasport
 * 6) Steph Davis
 * 7) Fanny Bullock Workman
 * 8) WikiProject Feminism/Open tasks
 * Update: Moving forward with Portal:Children's literature. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 22:06, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Now at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Children's literature. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:28, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
 * This last one is still pending. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:52, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

2003 Oscars
Hi there,

Sorry if you're busy, but would you kindly comment and proofread 75th Academy Awards for featured list promotion here. It has been almost a month, and it would be a pity and waste of a nomination to be closed because no one reviewed it. I would greatly appreciate your help.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 20:48, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for thinking of me, Birdienest81, a bit busy in life at the moment but will try to take a look. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

FA review
Hello Cirt. I'm curious if you're available to comment on Megadeth's FAC page. Please point out any mistakes you find, though I'd prefer a non-free media check, since that is obligatory for these nominations. Thanks for the time and see you soon.--Retrohead (talk) 17:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Not going to have much time lately because of family vacation type plans and such. I'll try to take a look when I get back into town. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:01, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Beck v. Eiland-Hall
I write because you commented that I had "vandalized" the Beck v. Eiland-Hall page, apparently because a semi-anonymous editor complained to you about it.

Putting aside the part of the edit that was funny, the remainder of the edit -- which I've put into the discussion, and which when entered into the page was reverted under the guise of edits on another subject -- concerned *sources*.

In particular, the majority of the sources to which the article refers have been deleted from the web. Meanwhile, the content of the page itself has been sterilized so there is virtually nothing on it other than a cut-and-paste from a single legal brief. Seriously -- read the brief, compare to the article. There's almost no other content.

Considering that the subject of the article is a lawsuit that arose from an individual's attempt to erase from the Internet all mention of himself in a light he found negative, that is a concern.

The semi-anonymous editor seems to think that I have a political agenda. I don't. I couldn't care less who Glenn Beck is, or what he's about. Virtually every edit I've made on wiki has related to a single subject area, which is articles about individuals in which it seems clear that persons working for that individual have edited the page in an effort to control their public perception.

For example, the page on convicted fraudster Jordan Belfort (if my edits are reverted as of today) is almost entirely sourced to Mr. Belfort's self-published memoir. Where other sources are cited, the wiki article is actually referring to those sources' quotations of statement made by Mr. Belfort. I attempted to edit by deleting material sourced only to the self-published memoir which was not notable in any event (Mr. Belfort's lemonade stand and that sort of nonsense) and adding in material sourced to legitimate, neutral news sources. The edits were reverted once as "original research," and then the *same edits* were reverted a second time, this time as supposedly NPOV.

So too, the page on convicted fraudster Ray Nagin (before my edits, which in his case seem to have stuck).

So too, the page on Dasha Zhukova (my edits were reverted three times, but have now stuck). In her case, Ms. Zhukova is the leader of a slew of organizations that say they have social, fashion, or artistic functions. In reality, there is no evidence *anywhere* that those organizations exist --- *except* for references from webpages about Ms. Zhukova, and references *from each of the paper-only organizations to the others*.

With those articles, I've made some headway. Mr. Beck's attempt to eliminate all reference to the joke about him from the Internet, however... putting aside the "funny" bits, what exactly do I have to do so edits to the page concerning the *ongoing censorship of the subject of the article* do not get continuously reverted and attacked as somehow political?

Djcheburashka (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyedit or Peer review
Hi there,

I've done all of my editing and fixing of the desired Academy Award ceremonies I plan to submit for featured list promotion well into early 2015. Now I plan to start some cleaning up the 2010 NBA Finals article so I can help promote it to Good Article status (and eventually Featured article status). I'm not sure if I should submit the article for copyedit or peer review first. What would be the best way to start the process and get help? I actually started a little fixing back in 2011 but got overwhelmed. Your advice is tremendously appreciated.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 05:14, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Thirty Seconds to Mars
Hello there. Would you like to comment on Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Thirty Seconds to Mars/archive2? The first nomination failed and your comments there were helpful.--Earthh (talk) 12:03, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Deletion review for Mitchell Mann
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Mitchell Mann. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Snooker155 (talk) 22:01, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles Future GAN Backlog Drive
Hello everyone! Hope you've all been having a great summer!

TheQ Editor recently proposed the idea of having another Backlog Drive in either September/October or November/December of this year. For those of you who have participated in the past two drives you know I was the one who organized them, however, come September, this will be my most important year in school so I will not be able to coordinate this drive (if it happens). TheQ Editor has volunteered to be a coordinator for the drive. If any of you would like to co-coordinator, please notify TheQ Editor on his talk page.

If you would be interested in participating in a Backlog Drive sometime before the end of this year, please notify TheQ Editor. Also, make sure to specify what month(s) work best for you.

At the time this message was sent out, the backlog was at 520 nominations. Since May, the backlog has been steadily increasing and we are currently near an all time high. Even though the backlog will not disappear over one drive, this drive can lead to several others which will (hopefully) lead to the day where there is no longer a backlog.

As always, the more participants, the better, and everyone is encouraged to participate!

Sent by Dom497 --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup
Hello everyone! We hope you have all been having a great summer!

As we all know, the recent GAN Backlog Drives have not had any big impact on the backlog. Because of that, me (Dom497), Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor have worked on an idea that could possibly finally put a dent into the massive backlog. Now, I will admit, the idea isn't entirely ours as we have took the general idea of the WikiCup and brought it over to WikiProject Good Articles. But anyways, here's what we have in mind:

For all of you that do not know what the WikiCup is, it is an annual competition between several editors to see who can get the most Good Articles, Featured Article's, Did You Know's, etc. Based of this, we propose to you the GA Cup. This competition will only focus on reviewing Good articles.

For more info on the proposal, click here. As a FYI, the proposal page is not what the final product will look like (if you do go ahead with this idea). It will look very similar to WikiCup's page(s).

The discussion for the proposal will take place here. Please let us know if you are interested, have any concerns, things to consider, etc.

--Dom497, Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Voyage au pays des nouveaux gourous for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Voyage au pays des nouveaux gourous 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/Voyage au pays des nouveaux gourous 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. Drmies (talk) 03:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I will not be participating in this discussion,, but I will instead respectfully defer to the consensus from the community at the outcome of the normal WP:AFD process. I hope you are well, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey Cirt, I am sorry you can't participate in it (I read that correctly, right?). If it were up to me, I wouldn't mind at all--if you like, I can ask for an exemption on AN. Let me know if you're interested in that. We don't agree on lots of things, but I think we're both straight shooters. Take care, Drmies (talk) 14:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi there,, I'm not interested in that, but I thank you for the kind words. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:42, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Christian Lujan


The article Christian Lujan has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Unsourced, no relevant reliable sources found to indicate notability in organizational management. Tagged since 2010.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tgeairn (talk) 03:37, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification,, I will take no action here, and instead respectfully defer to community consensus from established site procedures. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:43, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the response, I understand. If this goes to AfD and you have any comments you wish to make, feel free to place them here and tag me - I will copy/paste your comments to the AfD. Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 16:52, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your offer,, but I will not do that, and please do not copy/paste my comments anywhere. As you may see from below, I was notifed by that this was subsequently brought by  to WP:AFD. I will not be participating in this discussion,  and , but I will instead respectfully defer to the consensus from the community at the outcome of the normal WP:AFD process. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, no problem. Have a great evening. --Tgeairn (talk) 19:21, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mona Vasquez


The article Mona Vasquez has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * There are no reliable secondary sources about the BLP subject. Mention in passing in a questionable source does not imbue notoriety.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tgeairn (talk) 03:43, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notification,, I will take no action here, and instead respectfully defer to community consensus from established site procedures. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:43, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the response, I understand. If this goes to AfD and you have any comments you wish to make, feel free to place them here and tag me - I will copy/paste your comments to the AfD. Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 16:53, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your offer,, but I will not do that and please do not copy/paste my comments anywhere. If this goes to WP:AFD I will not be participating in this discussion, and , but I will instead respectfully defer to the consensus from the community at the outcome of the normal WP:AFD process. Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Christian Lujan for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christian Lujan 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/Christian Lujan 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. Drmies (talk) 18:47, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I will not be participating in this discussion,, but I will instead respectfully defer to the consensus from the community at the outcome of the normal WP:AFD process. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality improvement project

 * Hitachi Magic Wand

I'm currently embarking on a quality improvement project on the history of the Hitachi Magic Wand.

Apparently noticed my efforts and Upgraded the talk page rating to B-class quality.

Much appreciated,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:01, 22 September 2014 (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! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the notification, I've participated there. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 12:42, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Quality improvement project comments
Thank you to and  for drawing my attention to WikiProject Quality Article Improvement which is certainly a valuable project.

Perhaps more discussion would be helpful at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I just answered above, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay,, but that section has devolved off-topic of its original, so if discussion could please continue in this discussion or even better, please, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:31, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Go ahead, I see that you are bold ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Done. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 14:01, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Responded there, and started Open requests on top, - could be more beautiful, - ah, remember how to get attention, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:08, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Nice. Thank you. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 14:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Raffaella Di Marzio for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Raffaella Di Marzio 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/Raffaella Di Marzio 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. Randykitty (talk) 14:28, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, for this notification. I won't be participating in this deletion discussion, and will instead respectfully defer to the consensus outcome from the WP:AFD process as determined by the community. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:47, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: It appears the last time I edited this article page was seven (7) years ago. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:51, 25 September 2014 (UTC)