User talk:Elcobbola/Archive1

Matt's bar
To be honest, it was a borderline case. However, as the article failed to provide any third party sources beyond burger reviews, I felt that it did not meet assertion of importance standards. If you can provide a link to a newspaper article which talks about the place in general rather than just saying they do a good burger, I guess it would pass. However, 197 hits on Google is very poor for something which claims notability. пﮟოьεԻ  5  7  16:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The article actually didn’t link to any burger reviews. The links, which I’ve reproduced hereinafter linked to reference support (i.e. proof) that Matt’s had indeed won the awards claimed.  There is a distinct and important difference between a review and an award.


 * 


 * Providing “general” articles about restaurants is inherently problematic given the nature of their business. If one is to write about a restaurant, one is going to write primarily about the food (i.e. a review).  It is for this reason, therefore, that I believe discussion of volume and consistency of awards is a reasonable and practical means of establishing significance.


 * An example, in the vein of what you’ve requested, is available from the Associated Press, which also establishes national (U.S.) coverage of Matt’s. Another example is Youngblood, Dick (March 12, 1997), “Matt's dispels report predicting the demise of Jucy Lucy cheeseburger”, Star Tribune. The latter is a print article; I have photographs of the original, which I'd be happy to produce if you're truly interested.


 * The non-UK version of Google, by the way, produces 4650 hits. The measure of notability is as follows: “A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject”, not Google hits. Elcobbola 19:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Apart from a quibble about your google search (it does not include a + by Minneapolis, and I actually only get 196 hits on the .com version (you the real number of articles by clicking until the end of the pages)) and the fact that half the links to city pages only actually say the place's name and give no information whatsoever about it, the other links you provide (ASAP and Highbeam) do just about meet the criteria. Nevertheless, I suspect some other editors might still tag it for notability issues if you recreate the article - two sources is hardly significant coverage. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  14:24, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The City Pages links are solely meant to prove that Matt’s did indeed win the award claimed, not to provide any other substantive material. To that end, I put them in only to comply with WP:REF. An analogy is the list of Fortune 500 companies, which also contains names without further elaboration. The point, in both cases, is that being listed is an indication of importance/significance.


 * The two links were assembled in haste to demonstrate that articles are indeed readily available and that the Matt’s Article, consequently, meets the criteria of being notable; they are not, as you imply, the sole sources of coverage and it would be a simple matter to produce more. Elcobbola 15:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the GA assessment on Gold a a i
Thanks that's a very detailed, accurate assessment, and you obviously put a lot of work into it. Smallbones (talk) 23:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Your GA assessment of Semi-Tough
A shame that you did not feel you could put the article on hold instead, and let me work on those points. Thanks anyways for the feedback and suggestions, I will implement your ideas and resubmit for GA nom. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage (talk) 20:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC).
 * Holds are to be applied "if the changes needed are minor and can be reasonably expected to be completed before the hold expires" (emphasis added). I would not characterize the changes needed as minor.  Similarly, I consider it unreasonable to expect that copy-editing and research and inclusion of the reactions of those whom the film parodied to take place before expiration of the hold.  As the article meets neither of the criterion for a hold (and it need only miss one to be ineligible), I don't believe it appropriate to consider the failure "a shame".  Ɛƚ  ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 00:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps your viewpoint of what could be completed during the hold period and mine are different, and that's fine. Again, thank you for your feedback and your suggestions.  I have begun to address your points, and after I have done so and commented on your points on the talk page, we shall see what the next GA reviewer thinks.  Curt Wilhelm VonSavage (talk) 07:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC).

I am sory it was not my edit that you reverted
I only added linkbait to the Search engine optimization page, and you have not reverted that but you reverted this

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Search_engine_optimization&curid=187946&diff=173345909&oldid=173344583

I do not know who's ip is this so I would like an investigation by administartion of this incident. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/88.232.211.82 Elcobbola (talk) You are making false claims against me. Igor Berger (talk) 21:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

This is not my ip address and you are starting a flame war on Wikipedia, I motion Elcobbola (talk) to be banned! Igor Berger (talk) 21:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Revisions made by 88.232.211.82 replaced valid links with a non-English site that asserts no relevance to the topics of .NET Framework‎ or Search engine optimization. I have never touched an edit by you, “Igor Berger”, and I would welcome the notification of a synop in response to your unfounded and inappropriate threat.  Ɛƚ  ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 21:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Something is wrong or I am reading this wrong way.
 * If I am my apology to you, dear Sir.
 * (diff) (hist) . . m Search engine optimization‎; 20:51 . . (+45) . . Elcobbola (Talk | contribs) (Reverted 1 edit by 88.232.211.82 identified as vandalism to last revision by Igorberger. using TW)


 * Oh very, very sory, the guy vandalized my last edit...
 * I am very stupid, please forgive me...I am new here and still having trouble with the context code...really, really sory!
 * Igor Berger (talk) 22:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * We all make mistakes; I appreciate the prompt apology. Going forward, and especially as someone new, be careful to keep reactions tempered.  Two edits, by anyone and for any reason, are not of sufficient quantity to justify claiming “flame war” and threatening a ban.  Wikipedia requires measured and proportional interactions.  Ɛƚ  ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 23:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for teaching me, I have alot to contribute, but have more to learn. Igor Berger (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I woud like to add some authority by Adam Lasnik
I took a look at the link the attacker tried to change, and came up with a higher Authority reference.

Adam Lasnik "Therefore, as you might guess, if there’s a page you want to have kept secret or absolutely kept out of Google, you’d be better off: - putting it behind an authenticated login (best)"

I do belive Danny Sullivan is an expert on SE, but to add a confirmation by a Googler will provide more Authority to the article page. [Original source from an interview with Adam LAsnik by StoneTemple] So lets just add this with Adam's quote to Danny's link ref, okay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Igorberger (talk • contribs) 22:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Jays Foods, was selected for DYK!
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 20:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Your GA assessment of Ancient Greek cuisine
Hi! I'm the author of the French version of this article. It was featured some time ago (February 2006) when, I believe, FA criterias where different both on en: and fr: I'm not very familiar with the GA procedure. What happens now? Do I have some time to correct the deficiencies you pointed out or is it too late? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 18:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Greetings, now you’ll just want to address the concerns from the assessment; there are three main ones: inline citations are badly needed, grammar is poor (I assume this is just a translation issue) and cohesion/lucidity of thought. It’s never “too late” to have an article promoted.  Once the revisions have been made, re-nominate the article here.  If you’d like me to review it again at that point, just let me know and I’d be happy to do so promptly (so you won’t have to wait the typical month or so).  Otherwise, another reviewer will pick it up and go from there.  There’s a lot of good content in the article and I suspect it will be easy to promote once the content is cohesive and referenced.  Ɛƚ  ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 18:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Spaetzle
Hi - thanks for your comments re my reversion of your edit. You say that Spaetzle is not known to come from Southern Germany. The following websites - the first a Bavarian website - show its origin from Southern Germany - and even mention Schwabia in particular.

http://www.food-from-bavaria.de/de/reg_spez/einzelprodukt.php?an=228&display_lang=en http://www.florilegium.org/files/FOOD/recipes-msg.html http://www.topicala.com/tag/sp%C3%A4tzle http://www.travelplaces.co.uk/travelplaces/renault/mr-destination-nurburgring4.htm

this source mentions the particular popularity of the dish in Schwabia

http://www.london.diplo.de/Vertretung/london/en/01/German__Food__Wine/Regional__specialities/Spaetzle__DownloadDatei,property=Daten.pdf

Regards Kunchan (talk) 22:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I said, "their origin is not known and is a matter of debate". Given that there is a debate, of course there are going to be some sources saying they're from Southern Germany (I’m the one who added the “Food from Bavaria” reference in the first place).  There are, however, also sources available that claim Spätzle originated elsewhere (see examples below). As there is no definite consensus, it’s irresponsible to ignore contradictory information and claim just one area.  This is why phrasing such as “generally attributed” is preferable.  (In the interest of full disclosure, I did indeed say “Spätzle are not from Southern Germany, which is a lack of precision on my part; I meant “not necessarily from Southern Germany”).


 * I never claimed that they weren’t popular in Schwabia; quite the contrary, I know all too well that they are popular there. The issue is that the phrasing “much favoured” is not appropriate for an encyclopedia article.  Further, even if we were to change the phrasing to “popular in Schwabia”, it would be silly, as they’re just as popular in many other places.  There’s no need to single out Schwabia.


 * Here are some non-Southern Germany examples (some are German, which I assume you can read since you have babel DE-4):
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * Ɛƚ ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 23:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

GA assesment of Heuschrecke 10
I have not found any references for any of this
 * The reason(s) it was not put into active service.
 * This was essentially a turret delivery vehicle that could carry ordinance once the turret had been deployed. Why, then, is there so little discussion about armament and so much about armor (something that, in the article’s current state, appears to be of minimal importance)?
 * Do historians or contemporary figures (axis and/or allies) have opinions about the vehicle’s expected impact on the war effort, had it been utilized?
 * How is it that one of these survived, given the German desperation for materials late in the war? The PzKfW in the photo is at the United States Army Ordnance Museum. How did the US get their hands on one?

Sorry, but if you could help find those, I will put them in. &lt; DREAMAFTER &gt; &lt; TALK &gt; 22:56, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The second bullet was more so pointing out irony than a substantial flaw; this thing is a leFH with a fancy chassis – the leFH gets and sentence while the armor plating gets a huge table. In any case, I suggested a source on the article’s talk page that will give you more information on the leFH (on which a similar table would be nice – hint, hint).


 * I’m conflicted about the other requests. On the one hand, this was a fringe vehicle that only had three prototypes.  It’s understandable, therefore, that information would be sparse.  On the other hand, not one, but two, incredibly significant firms (Krupp and Rheinmetall) played around with this thing from 1942-1945.  Given the players working on this and the time period, it was very important to someone.  Ultimately, I’m confident the information is out there, but I think significant research involving trips to libraries/archives would be needed to get it.  That sort of effort is unreasonable to ask and certainly beyond the scope of a GA assessment.  Once the information from the new sources is incorporated, I’ll be content (no pun intended).  The caveat, however, is that this will likely never be a FA.  Ɛƚ  ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 16:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * How is it now? Anything else to work on to get it to GA? &lt; DREAMAFTER &gt; &lt; TALK &gt; 21:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Still wrong? Yes? No? Maybe? Toaster? &lt; DREAMAFTER &gt; &lt; TALK &gt; 01:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Design looks good, but competition still says the Krupp Heuschrecke was superior. Ɛƚ  ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 01:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I've got it now! &lt; DREAMAFTER &gt; &lt; TALK &gt; 01:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Wolf Armoured Vehicle
Hey Elcobbola, first off, thanks for giving me that second opinion. I was really stuck, because I unsure whether an article of that length and context was suitable for GA. I've left comments on the talk page, incorporating the points you made. Thank you once again. Best, &mdash; Rudget Contributions 16:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

John Balchen
Thankyou for passing this for GA and for the extensiev review your provided before you did so. just to note, The reason a discussion of health hazards of the 18thC West Indies was included was that my main sources mentioned this explicitly and so I believe it is important to explain in the article. i also think discussion of a persons offspring is always relevant in a biographical article, as long as it doesn't dominate the page. Anyway, thankyou again and regards.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Covering of the Senne
All of your concerns have been either addressed or responded to. Thoughts? - Oreo Priest  15:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ditto.- Oreo Priest  20:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Some of your concerns have been responded to, though not all of them. At this point, though relatively minor, I cannot make any more of your recommended changes in clean conscience, as I think they would worsen the article. I ask you to now pass it, fail it, or ask for a second opinion. Thanks,  Oreo Priest  01:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * As you wish. It’s unfortunate that suggestions have been met with a combative reaction.  Ɛƚ  ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 02:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

GA Assessment on Sivaji - Requesting a look again
Dear Elcobbola, I chanced upon the above article and I contributed my might in improving the article. I looked at your assessment after failing the GA nomination.

I did a makeover of the article now but, the article still lacks a critiques and a DVD section, which I shall be working towards it within the next few days. However, I was hoping to have your cooperation in this article yet again. If you can spare some time and give me a heads-up on the current look of the article, it will greatly help me in improving it.

Merry Christmas and best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 15:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I've done some more work on the Sivaji article. I hope I've addressed most of what it lacked. I've added critiques now...the DVD, I don't think is out and hence that is not included. Overall, I suppose it is a good all-round article. You may have a look at any questionable POVs from the article which shall be edited suitably. Thereafter, I intend to push this for a GA. Your thoughts? Regards, Mspraveen (talk) 05:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

GA assessment of Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy
Dear Elcobbola, Thank you very much for taking the time to review Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy. I very much appreciate the well-documented commentary, keyed to the review criteria. I'll review your points and when and if I can address them to achieve Wikipedia criteria, I'll check back with you for a second look. A few points of clarification: Sincerely, --User:HopsonRoad 03:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * In Germany he used the spelling, "Rosenstock-Hüssy." In the U.S., he used the anglicized spelling of "Rosenstock-Huessy." This may be ambiguous in the lede, but it's important because his bibliography has two spellings, depending on when he published. Except for the explanation of the name's spelling while he lived in Germany and as author to the German works of that period in the bibliography, "Rosenstock-Huessy" is used throughout elsewhere.
 * As to the source of the material drawn from, there is no autobiographical material present. The two main sources are from close associates and former students who have furthered his work through publications (Argo Books) and a society whose purpose is to further his teaching (Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy Fund). Both are non-profits. Each entity provided a source of biographical material. Each paragraph shows which entity is the source, when applicable.

Re:Heuschrecke 10 images
I will try to find the e-mails that I have stating that I may use the images and forward them to you. Dreamafter ⇔ 19:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, yes, of course. I will do my best, but it may take a while as I'm not at work for a while, and I'm pretty sure that the e-mails are at work. I also have about three home e-mails. I will have them before a week is up. I will need you to e-mail me with your e-mail, so that I can forward them to you. Dreamafter ⇔ 19:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps
Hello. Regarding about the GA sweep, I am sorry to tell you that it's only available through invitation, as indicated on WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps. If you would like to assist sweeping, please show me a few GA reviews that you have completed. OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I took a brief look at some of your reviews. I found that you did not give editors enough time to improve the article before you failed it. If the article doesn't pass, you should put it "on hold" for a few days to give others a chance to improve it to standard. After the hold expires, then you may go on and fail it. OhanaUnited<b style="color:green;">Talk page</b> 21:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Translation?
Hello, I am the creator of All Saints' Church, Wittenberg, Germany. It isn't a very big article now, since I'm having trouble finding references in English. However, there is a large page on it in the German Wikipedia, under the article name "Schloss Wittenberg". I am confident that, if this is translated and the information added to the English version, then All Saints' will surely be able to reach GA status. Thank you for you time, Benjamin  Scrīptum est  -   Fecī 18:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Yeah, I think that if you could translate it and put it into a sandbox, say User:Bmrbarre/German to English Translation, that would be amazing. You're right...it not having sources is a problem. If I could ask you and if you would be willing, perhaps you could type in "Schlosskirche Wittenberg" into google or something, and find a couple of German refs, see if you can find stuff to support what is said, and then use that as a source, but say that it's in German? When the text that is translated does get added, I think that we should disclaim that the article incorporates text from the version on the German Wikipedia, maybe that'll be good enough? I dunno...do what you feel is best, I suppose. Thanks a bunch, though, I truly appreciate your time and effort, Benjamin  Scrīptum est  -   Fecī 03:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Speed Monster
Hey - you had this tagged as on review since December 27. I hope you don't mind that I've gone ahead and reviewed it. &mdash; <b style="color:#12A434">Dihydrogen Monoxide</b> 22:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Given the comments here, could you possibly take a look at the German source and see if you can make a difference? Thanks, &mdash; <b style="color:#12A434">Dihydrogen Monoxide</b> 22:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the Barnstar of Good Humor!! Didn't even know that existed, but seeing it I think everybody should try to earn one of them now and then, just to keep things on a lighter plane. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Activity survey for members of WikiProject Companies

 * placed on talk pages of all participants

I wanted to get a notion of the level of activity of people who are members of WikiProject Companies with respect to monitoring the WikiProject Talk page and participating in discussions of interest and/or responding to requests for input.

Could you please visit Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies/Member information and adding yourself to one or more of the several groupings listed?

Thanks for your assistance.

--User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 03:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

asserting
Asserting a company has a reasonably long continued importance and holds a number of patents is in my view both assertions of importance.Any assertion isenough to pass speedy. DGG (talk) 01:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Leaving!
That's it! I've had enough! I'm leaving! Maybe the Wookiepedia will accept me... Just for the future:  Leia is sooooooooooo hot in that bikini! Au revoir... 70.245.109.89 (talk) 02:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll miss the time we shared. You are truly an intellectual.  Ɛƚ  ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 02:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

User talk:76.213.150.5
Even if he did stop you should leave it on AIV. Your choice,   Compwhiz II ( Talk )( Contribs )  02:56, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I Put it back. Constant Vandal.   Compwhiz II ( Talk )( Contribs )  02:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

GAN suggestion
Hi Elco, just pinging you re: the discussion at GAN. I recently suggested an overhaul of the templates and system used to organize GANs. You expressed earlier that you don't think the present system is overly complex. I disagree, and think that my proposal would make the process vastly easier for at least some (potential) editors, without any downside. Could you take a look and comment on it? Thanks! -Pete (talk) 19:08, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You're leaving GAN?? Just as I'm starting to enjoy working with you?? -Pete (talk) 21:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Uh, ever heard of a watchlist? ;) -Pete (talk) 22:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I habitually watch user pages when I leave messages there…helps prevent flaking on discussions, esp. when people reply on their own pages. If that makes you feel like I'm stalking you, never fear, because that means I'm stalking half of Wikipedia. -Pete (talk) 23:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * WikiAnschauung? Yeah, I usually skp the big words. It makes reading so much easier! ;) -Pete (talk) 23:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

WP Companies: Deletion discussion notification template
Template created - input requested before listing on Main WikiProject page. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 12:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!
<div style="background-color: white; border: #5B92E5 solid 2px; margin-bottom:.5em; padding: 5px; font-family: trebuchet ms, sans-serif;"><font color="#084C9E">Dear Elcobbola, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget . 16:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Companies - 4 recent discussion threads

 * ''same message on participants' talk pages who indicated "Put something on my talk page if you want my input"

Discussion threads opened in the past week at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies in case you would like to comment: --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 00:57, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Indicating participants who are admins
 * Brand names section on Main page - expansion
 * WikiProject Parentage statement
 * Revisions to the Main Page: Revision to opening inches

Oliver
I was not offended and may myself owe you an apology for such a snarky statement.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

DKY
Real life ... a moment (or 15) Victuallers (talk) 20:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for reverting the change to my user page. I'd no idea I was so popular ;-) Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)