User talk:Dom497/Archive/July - December 2014

GA recuitment
Hi Dom, hope all is well with you. I wanted to check in with you and see where you are about resuming our improvements about the Centre. I'm assuming that now that it's late June, your exams are over. Or are you too busy watching futbol? ;) Anyway, I'm available if you'd like to continue. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:35, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hey, I've tried to do many things in an effort to improve Wikipedia (aka backlog drives) and everything I've done has failed. I'm not to sure if I'm willing to put my time into the Centre as....well....to be honest I no longer think its going to change anything...unless we put A LOT of effort in (which is time I don't have)....and the last thing I want right now is to go all in for something I hope/think is going to work but in the end doesn't. Sorry.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 02:51, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Dom, if you'd like, can I work with Figureskatingfan on the Recruitment Centre? I'm guessing you're going to say no, as I am under-experienced anyways with only about 150-200 mainspace edits ;) Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon!  03:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Brandon, I'd be inclined to agree that it's too early for you to take on such a big project. If I take it on, I'll keep you in mind for support, which is always needed. There's so many other things to do around here, the least of which to improve and care for articles, so I think that's what you should focus on now. Speaking of the project--Dom, I'm still thinking. I've had some other fish to fry here and elsewhere, which is why I haven't responded, although I still haven't decided one way or the other. I'd hate for all our previous work to be for naught, doncha know. I disagree with you that the Centre has been as much of a failure as you say; instead, I'd say that your expectations have been too high. The nature of mentorship is the kind of activity that takes a lot of work, and since it's one-on-one, there are fewer results. I think that if we were to continue the Centre, we'd have to keep it small and simple. If our goal was to get more people involved in the GAC process and to improve the quality of reviews, that's a valid objective. I could also see a small core group of editors committed to the program. I'm inclined to take it on, so I'll take a look at the improvements in the next day or so and get back to you. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Dom, just saw your note; what a wonderful opportunity to spend your summer travelling! Anyway, if I decide to go further with this, do I have your blessings to continue without you? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:22, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Absolutely!-- Dom497 ( talk ) 22:43, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Falcon's Fury
I know none of you have really done anything to the Falcon's Fury article but since I will be going on vacation for the next month (almost), I wanted to ask you guys if you could help me out by maintaining the article. At the very least, if a news article comes out, can you please archive it at Wayback and leave the link on my talk page? It would be even better if you wanted to add the info! You see, I plan on nominating the article for GA and eventually FA (I was hoping the ride would of opened in May...) and seeing that its very possible that this ride will open while I'm gone, I really don't want to come back and see the article has had a meltdown (IP's...). Thanks.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 22:26, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I will be on vacation next week but I will try to help out when I get back.Wackyike (talk) 22:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Added to my watchlist. I'll keep an eye on it. -- McDoob  AU93  18:16, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Goliath SFOG
I'm honestly surprised you're getting taken in by this. Please read the first "Elements" line at the RCDB listing. To save time, I'll copy it here:
 * 200 ft tall Lift Hill with a 170 ft drop

-- McDoob AU93  13:56, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Whoops....I was packing for my trip today and I took a quick break to do a final "check-up" on Wiki and wasn't really thinking straight. I misread that. Sorry.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 16:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * No worries. I know and trust your work and just wanted to make sure. I added HTML comments to clarify that Goliath's first drop is not its tallest, and I also added additional prose to clear that up in the "ride experience" section. Have a great trip! -- McDoob  AU93  16:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Carson2345
I've reported the user to the edit-warring noticeboard, so for now, let's not undo their damage until this is settled there. We've got enough evidence that we've tried to alert the user and reason with them, but obviously they're not listening, so I don't think this will WP:BOOMERANG on us. -- McDoob AU93  18:39, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

GAN Drive
Good Morning! It has been a while since our previous GAN drive in March, and I'm interested in seeing it coming later this year, perhaps Nov-Dec. I've already discussed it with other people. And since you've helped organize the past few drives, perhaps you can help with this one? Thanks,  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 13:58, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hey there! I had someone else ask me the same question ago 3 months ago so I'll just copy and paste it: "Ok, here we go. You probably haven't noticed what has happened over the past 2 drives. Both were a result of me trying to revive the drives. The first drive was a good success (but still not great) and the 2nd drive was an absolute failure. Setting up a drive and figuring out how to run it (rules, how to attract people to participate, etc) isn't easy and setting up each drive did take quite a while to set up. After reviewing the 2 drives I came to the conclusion that the time I spent in running/setting up the drives didn't pay off (in terms that the results weren't the best) and therefore will not be setting up any more drives as I have better things to use my time for. Sorry." Something I forgot to mention in that reply was that in the second drive, the backlog was larger at the end of the drive than it was at the beginning (hence the "absolute failure"). In addition to this, I'm going into Gr. 12 (can't screw this year up!), so I don't want to get into things that will very time consuming. Sorry.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 14:28, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, so what you are saying is that you are not going to organize a drive again. But can I get a go? You didn't fail. You just found ways that didn't work. Cheers,  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 14:31, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, I will not be organizing any future drives at this time. When the point of a backlog drive is to REDUCE a backlog but in the end the backlog is LARGER...that's a fail and a half. Also, you can organize it if you want but I strongly suggest you try to find a co-coordinator. Even before that, I suggest you send out a mass message to find out who would be interested in another drive (if you don't know how to send out a mass message let me know and I'll show you). If less than 15 people willing to be part of the drive, I would think twice about spending time organizing the drive.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 14:40, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * So, how do I send a mass message? Thanks,  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 14:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I just realized you need to be approved to send mass messages (I'm surprised that there are only 32 non-admins that have this right, including me). I'll send it out on your behalf.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 14:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok, I know 100% I used to have a mailing list set-up (mass messaging is kinda of a b**** in terms of how you have to tell it who send the message to) but I can't seem to find the page (I may have deleted it). I'm going to ask for your help because I don't want to manually change 246 names. If you want to help, out, start from the top and I'll start from the bottom so we don't edit conflict each other. Click here and follow what I did for the first few.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 15:08, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Wait a sec, I would love to help out, but what excatly are you doing, or what should I do? Can you please explain it more thoroughly. Thanks,  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 15:13, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I know what to do now  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 15:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I finished! All you needed to do was find and replace.  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 15:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much!-- Dom497 ( talk ) 15:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Recruitment
Hey Dom, I noticed that you mentioned me on another user's talk page. I've been meaning to touch base with you, but it's been a busy summer. I still haven't decided if I'm going to take on the Recruitment Centre, mostly because I've been distracted with other more shiny things and focusing my energies on other things here. So you can see that my motivation isn't all that high. I keep waiting for the motivation to hit me, but it hasn't yet, despite all the work we've done thus far. I may take that as a sign that it's not a project I'd want to manage, but I'm still undecided. I think that I'd like to hold off on making a decision one way or the other until after the Wikicup's over. If I get into the finals, I'll decide after it's over in late October; if not, it will be much sooner, at the end of this month. Question though: As someone who's involved in GAC, do you think that the Centre would make a difference in the backlog? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hey, sorry for the late reply (I read your post on my phone but completely forgot about it. Plus, my watchlist randomly filled up so your edit was all the way at the bottom). That's a tough question. If we keep the current "system", no. If you change the "system", maybe. There's no way in telling because I don't know what the final "system" will be. But, in general, I don't think so. IMO, the only way to get the backlog down is through drives which have only proven to be a little successful (and this is where I think you should spend most of your energy, as I said before, no matter what we do to the RC, I still think it is a lost cause). Now, here's where things get interesting. As much as I said I would never organize another backlog drive, I AM up for the option of us three (me, TheQ Editor, and Figureskatingfan) working  together to come up with a good drive system that might work. I still won't run the drive (I might be on the side lines watching) but I'm willing to work with you two to try and make this work.-- Dom497  ( talk ) 13:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm alright with that. The only problem with the GA elimination drives is that there are not many people participating in it which brings us to the previous subject, the recruitment centre. The GA reviews are not as easy to do than AFCs. First of all, not many people do not know about it or do not know how to recruit (that's where an advertisement might come in handy). Secondly, they take longer and the time it takes to review them just throws it off. I would recommend a more creative way of eliminating the backlog with lots of different barnstars.  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 15:47, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It looks like there already is one, I put one on my userpage just now.  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 16:00, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * We tried advertising...a lot. We were even in the Singpost and that did nothing. Also, about the whole barnstar thing, that's the reason why Backlog Drives were so "successful" at first....because people reviewed JUST for the barnstar and rubber stamped reviews (rushed the review (aka: low quality)). There was a RfC that brought up the concern and even though most of the people involved said "yes, we should change the rules", when we changed the rules, everyone literally said "screw this".-- Dom497 ( talk ) 16:46, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Guys, the GOCE drives seem to be relatively successful, and they give out prizes and barnstars. Do they have a problem with rubber stamping?  It doesn't seem so.  The key seems to be consistent and regular drives and rewarding people for reviewing articles.  FAC always has a long queue, but they don't seem to have the same issues with long backlogs like GAC has, even with its more stringent requirements.  What do you think about following DYK's example?  Their QPQ seems to be successful in keeping queues short.  What do you guys think about instituting the same thing are GAR?  It would mean that nominators would be required to review one article for every one they submit.  Another idea is to make it into a competition, like the Wikicup.  We could set up points based upon the length and content of articles.  People need incentives to review articles, and for GAC, it simply isn't there.  If we came up with some, perhaps the backlog would decrease.  Just some thoughts. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:26, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm all for that....just that the QPQ idea was proposed before and no one wanted it (excluding me)....-- Dom497 ( talk ) 17:35, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

GAN Backlog
Ok, I'm only pinging you three because your the only 3 that seem to have worthy ideas. Maybe its because I'm seriously out of the loop but there seems to be several small discussions about how to control this nomination backlog. Because of this (and I can already see this happening), one group of people will say yes to an idea and implement it and then they'll be another group who don't like the idea and the idea is removed (and it will continue going in a circle). On that note, I think we need to get EVERYONE together, talking on ONE page. I know we tried it before (and it failed), but I think our only (best) hope is to open another RfC. Here's how it would work:


 * 1) First stage: Everyone lists their ideas on how to control the backlog.
 * 2) Second stage: We vote. Obviously there will be a mix of support and oppose but at this point I think we have no choice but to go with the majority of the votes. Also, I'm not really doing anything for the next two weeks (I was really hoping to get one of my articles to FA but given that I can't find someone to copy-edit it, that plan has since went down the drain for now) so I have a vision to insure that the voting is organized and doesn't look like a giant mess.

Thoughts?-- Dom497 ( talk ) 19:36, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Not yet, still thinking. The problem is about how fast the nominations are coming in. There should be a bot that removes all  templates if the article has a citation needed, or cleanup tags. That should help clear the backlog of all quick-fail articles. Another thing I thought about. The older nominations stick around for that long is pretty much because they're hard to assess and nobody is willing to take on the responsibility ... alone. We could make it so that the oldest nomination can be reviewed by multiple users, somewhat like FAC. So that users could drop down a couple of notes, then leave. What do you all think?   ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 20:08, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Wow, I'm surprised I never thought of the tag removing. I don't know how many current nominations are in that situation but that is actually a very very very good idea! I guess this is where we bring in Legobot. Is it possible that you can make Legobot remove GA nominations that have citation needed or cleanup tags?
 * Regarding your second idea, I pretty sure that's been proposed before and everyone immediately beat it down. I'm for giving it a shot...as in we do trials (ask nominators if we can do a trail with their nomination and if they say yes, we give it a shot and see how it works). Also, just so you know, these two ideas wouldn't be enough to clear the backlog.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 22:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * There needs to be a higher incentive for harder-to-review articles. That's why I like the idea of a competition, which higher points going for articles that have been languishing the longest, articles that are longer in word count, articles with complicated and obscure content, ect.  Holding a competition is a separate issue, though, to better control the backlog.  It will help, but it should be an ancillary solution.
 * I also think that much of the responsibility for articles being reviewed should be on the nominators. I mean, if one of the articles I've submitted to GAN has been languishing for a long time, I take it on myself to ask another editor to review it for me.  That may seem unfair to articles that have been there for a while, and it feels like jumping the queue (something most of us are taught as children not to do), but it's appropriate.  Many nominators are relatively new editors unfamiliar with how reviews are conducted here, so they don't know that they can do that.  I would also support a QPQ system, but I wouldn't support multiple reviews like FAC.  GAN is supposed to be a lower level of review, which is why I always thought an article only needed one review to pass to GA and not several like FAs.  Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:37, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll give a "competition" a shot, I just don't know what exactly you plan on doing. A rough outline would be nice! (and I'll try to avoid the edit conflicts!)-- Dom497 ( talk ) 22:42, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * How about applying a multiplyer to points 1.2 for over 1 month, 1.4 for over 2 months, 1.6 for over 3 months and so on so that older nominations get prioritized.--00:21, 20 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs)
 * We tried that before. But the only problem is that we need more people to participate. Our last backlog only had a total of 7 people participating.  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 15:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The stricter the rules, the lower the participation will be.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm open to spear-heading a GA competition, but I'd need some assistance. And since I think that a GA competition is separate from attempts to decrease the backlog, I suggest moving a discussion elsewhere.  I can start it over on my talk page, if that's acceptable to everyone. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * How about we move it too Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles. It seems more relevant.  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 17:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No, absolutely not! Trust me when I say this: If we move the discussion there, everyone is going to have so many different opinions and there will be a bunch who will shoot the idea down completely (aka...by moving the discussion there, we will likely kill the idea). If I had to make a decision, I would say to develop this idea with a small group of people, and THEN expose it. Even though people will still find a way to complain about the idea, at that point, we would only make minor changes and the idea would hopefully take off. But doing this brings in the risk of us developing the whole thing and then nobody liking it. So...maybe we should propose the idea at GAN, see what the result is, and then develop it in the small group?-- Dom497 ( talk ) 17:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * That sounds reasonable enough.  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 18:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Is this competition thing a go or no go????? If we're going to do it we need to be committed.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 23:06, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I never said I was in. I was just offering advice on how to run it.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:09, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

If we can get enough people to participate, it's going. I'm only worried about the lack of participation like the previous drive.  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 23:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I tried Tony. :P Anyway, I'm thinking we should write a draft/general outline of what would happen and see how everyone reacts.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 02:48, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I've created a draft/outline page here. I don't think the draft should go into to much detail, just the basics of what will happen and some of the major rules/ways to earn points. Once we're done, we can propose it to the WikiProject.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 13:49, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry things have been a tad busy this week. I'll try and come up with some ideas this afternoon. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 13:57, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * So I've completed a draft version of the GA Cup at the page Dom provided, as well as explanations/thoughts at its talk page. I think that both pages are good places to discuss and tweak as needed.  Please go and take a look! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:38, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

GAN Drives+GA Recruitment Centre
Hey Dom, long time hearing from you. I noticed that you engaged in a conversation with a couple of users on GAN drives and the Recruitment Centre. I have a couple of ideas that may/may not work, but I think my idea would pretty much get tossed in the trash because of the fact that your group is much, much (and I mean extremely) more experienced then I am. It's your choice anyway, since I guess you are the "head" of the Recruitment Centre/Center, and you are pretty much the only person (besides your group of editors) that discusses GAN drives. Anyways, have a great rest of your day. Cheers! Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon!  15:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


 * What are your ideas?-- Dom497 ( talk ) 12:36, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hey Dom, and thanks for the ping. I propose that for the drive we have a system similar to the GOCE. Maybe we could have a competition for most articles reviewed, old articles needing review, and other "leaderboards." I don't actually know if there are categories like there are at the GOCE, but for drives you could make a design similar to the GOCE, with the categories such as "Articles needing review from August 2014" on the right hand side of the drive page. Also, TheQ Editor proposed an excellent idea with a bot taking off the GA nominee template on an article if there is a cleanup template in the article.


 * For the Recruitment Center, I think recruiters could have something like the CVUA with the recruiting on separate recruiters' userpages, for example Yunshui uses User:Yunshui/CVUA/-name- and maybe GA recruiters could have User:MrWooHoo/GARecruitment/-name-. Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon!  12:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I like that idea. It takes forever for me to get to the recruitment page when I was a recruitee, so I had to bookmark it. But I think the centre is down for now. Doesn't know what Dom would think about it. Cheers,  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 13:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * As I said above, I think we should spend more of our energy figuring out how to remove the backlog through drives/competitions/etc. But again, this is what I think. If you guys want to go ahead and give the RC another shot, by all means do so. :) -- Dom497 ( talk ) 13:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

It's starting again ...
Please keep an eye on Bolliger & Mabillard. Anon IP keeps changing the new Fury 325 model to Giga Coaster, which of course does not exist. I've already changed it more than I should have and don't want to touch it again. -- McDoob AU93  19:18, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I've requested for semi-protection.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 19:21, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Request
Hey Dom497. I request you to review the Lucknow article for GA status. I have worked tirelessly on the article pulling many all-nighters to make it a high quality WP article which includes copy-edit and restructuring. Now all it needs is an honest GA review because i will be out in some some days for a few months so i will not be able to provide solutions to the shortcomings which the article may have during the review and the nominations seem to have been pending since May and i wanted a rapid review. Thanking You. Wikiboy2364 (talk) 21:41, 26 August 2014 (UTC)


 * With school starting next week for me, I have a list of what I want to do on Wiki and I'm trying to do as much as I can within the next week (plus I have work for most of the remaining days)...so I won't have time for the review. Sorry.

DYK for Fury 325
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  22:42, 27 August 2014 (UTC) 00:03, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup
A user just left some feedback on the GA Cup talk page. One of his comments was about writing nominations. I'm surprised no one ever brought this up and I never thought about until now. My question: Should articles that a participant writes and gets promoted to GA be included in the competition (in terms of being able to get points for writing GA's)? I'd say no just to keep things simple for the first year. What are your thoughts?-- Dom497 ( talk ) 19:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

EDIT: Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, maybe we should...but that would increase OUR workload given that we would have to make sure two people aren't working together (one writes the article, other reviews it...already planning on passing it as his article will be passed by the other person). But then I guess that's where "reviewing every review" comes in play as we would be checking anyways.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 19:55, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Echo didn't trigger.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 11:36, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Remember, one of the purposes of the GA Cup is to decrease the backlog at GAN. This is a competition about reviews, not about creating and improving articles.  Although ultimately, if we're successful, that would be the secondary benefit.  That being said, I see no problem if a participant has a GA in the queue, and it gets reviewed by another participant.  The participant with the GA wouldn't get any points, though.  I think it should be against rules to earn points for reviews a participant has co-written; this point should be added to the rules, which I'll try and get to this afternoon. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with it, but I think we should see how it goes first. It's still the first year, and if it's successful, we could add it in the next year. But remember, the GA cup started was because the need to reduce the backlog (mostly of the older nominations).  ΤheQ Editor   Talk? 17:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Good....so no writing. I was hoping you would all say that!-- Dom497 ( talk ) 19:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, I agree that there is no writing points for the first Ga cup  NickGibson3900 Talk 22:04, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks and no problem!-- Dom497 ( talk ) 18:50, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

AFC Cup
Hey Dom, I proposed an "AFC Cup" to the AFC community [here]. Is it okay with you? Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon!  22:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't have anything to do with AFC so I can't influence your decision. But I will say that proposing the AFC Cup won't make matters any better for the GA Cup. I wouldn't be surprised if some negatives (that will probably affect the GA Cup) come out of the AFC proposal. But then again, I have no idea what the people are like over at AFC so they may think it is the best idea in the world.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 22:36, 13 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick reply. Thanks for the note. I'll see ya on October 1st ;) Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon!  22:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup question
Will you get points for reviews that ends in hold and not pass or fail? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 20:48, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * You get points for pass/fail. "On hold" means you are waiting for the nominator to address your comments (the review isn't even complete).-- Dom497 ( talk ) 01:07, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Change to banner
May I ask about this? I thought the message was much more encouraging with the old wording. &mdash;  MusikAnimal talk 22:12, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup
I would like to resign from the competition. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 18:00, 9 October 2014 (UTC)


 * May I ask why? It seems like whenever things don't go your way, you quit.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 18:47, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm a bad person. It's that simple. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 19:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Ugh.......no your not. I rather see you stay in...your not a bad influence.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 20:09, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Are you still participating in the competition?-- Dom497 ( talk ) 18:55, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yea sure. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 15:57, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

"Issues still present in the article"
So I can correct them, what present issues do you see in Italian cruiser Etruria? If it's the Regioni-class cruiser link I can tell you the article will be created shortly. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 15:57, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I am currently reviewing several of you articles. I will provide a link to all my comments when I am done.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 16:01, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, cheers. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:02, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Here are all my comments.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 16:17, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I have responded to all your comments, I'd like you to look at them. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:49, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

A concern
I don't know how much you know about this IP, but at the Video Game WikiProject we have him creating a thread, linked here, and talking up a proposition to award Jonas Vinther in exchange for making 500 reviews. This was before Jonas retired but I am concerned by this proposition. Specifically why the IP is asking this for another editor. Any ideas? GamerPro64 03:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * This doesn't surprise me at all....another judge of the GA Cup just emailed me suggesting the IP and Jonas are the same person....it makes sense. But either way, just remember to never feed the troll!-- Dom497 ( talk ) 13:39, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I am NOT connect to that IP user any way whatsoever! I joined Wikipedia in December 2013 and has since then done more than 10,000 edits, created dozens of articles and contributed to hundreds. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, and if you should accuse me of that again I will file a complaint for harassment. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:20, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * We never accused you, we have our suspicions...that'all. But thanks for clearing that up.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 14:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yea, that's beautiful Dom497, but I've decided to report you lot for harassment. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:27, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Account has been renamed
Hello Dom497, I was formerly WritingEnthusiast14, but I had my account renamed to Biblioworm. Can you please update the relevant GA Cup pages to reflect this change? Thanks. -- Biblioworm ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 02:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm really busy for the next few days so it's probably better to ask another judge.-- Dom497 ( talk )<


 * I have gone ahead and moved/changed the appropriate pages, etc. You're welcome. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:12, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Points?
Hi, looks like you review stuff to see if it gets GA cup points? How long does this take? I just passed an article yesterday, and I think I updated my submissions page properly, so can you let me know how long the processing process takes? Thanks! Montanabw (talk) 20:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You will be awarded points whenever a judge reviews your review. This will happen before the end of Round 1. If you have any other questions just let me know!-- Dom497 ( talk ) 21:06, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

LOL! You are one of the judges, right? Montanabw (talk) 03:17, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Montana, there are four of us. To spread out all the work!  Dom, unlike most WP editors, actually has a life, so he's letting the other three take up the slack, just like he did for me about two weeks ago when I had some major deadlines to meet.  I just checked your points this afternoon, so unless you submitted another GA (I haven't looked since), you should be good to go.  I'm here too, if you need any assistance. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:38, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * No worries, I just had the one, but also reported someone today for a kind of weird behavior on a different article ... Montanabw (talk)  07:10, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!
 NickGibson3900 Talk 02:46, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!!!
Cheers! &#34;We could read for-EVER&#59; reading round the wiki!&#34; (talk) 17:58, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup
I noticed the project page of the cup writes "2014–2015" but the official title reads "2014–15" - is there any reason for that? Would you, as a judge, mind if I changed the project page mentions to "2014-15"? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 00:31, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I know you didn't ask me, but I'd rather that you not. Mostly because I don't see what the problem is, or if it matters all that much. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:58, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "official title"?-- Dom497 ( talk ) 19:43, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

WP:RX Falcon Fury
Hi, I just wanted to let you know (before archiving your request as stale) that even though I searched for weeks, I couldn't find anything related to the 2012 FAA Permit for Falcon Fury. It simply does not exist online anywhere. - NQ (talk)  02:49, 23 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for giving it a shot. We reverted to emailing the government to release the information (Freedom of Information Act) over the Summer but we have yet to receive a reply....-- Dom497 ( talk ) 15:01, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Round 3 GA Cup
Hey Dom, hope all is well. I know you're busy with school, which should always take precedence over everything else, but are you able to set things up for Round 3 today? If not, let me know and I'll try and muddle through it myself, since I have the time. ASAP, of course! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:36, 30 November 2014 (UTC)