User talk:Giants2008/Archive 22

Featured list candidates/76th Academy Awards/archive1
Hi,

I fixed everything you requested for the 2004 Oscars.
 * -Birdienest81 (talk) 08:37, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR RFC
There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Your comments were resolved at the FLC. Please, talkback there. Thanks.— Prashant 16:22, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

FL
Hello, I was wondering why any lists has not been promoted, just curious since I am seeing lots of list ready to be promoted. I would really appreciate a response. — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 21:50, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Mikhail Youzhny career statistics FL
Point taken, but you could have stated these defects in the article in the previous review, but didn't, which is a bit odd, since you opposed it, and then simply "left".... --TIAYN (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

FLC
Hi, I need your inputs here &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  06:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
 * , a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
 * , another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
 * , 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
 * , a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
 * , the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
 * , who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
 * , a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
 * 1) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final:, , , , , , ,. Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 06:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Switzerland Olympic hockey FLC
Hi, could you please review the Featured list candidates/List of Olympic men's ice hockey players for Switzerland/archive1 again? I saw that you noted your comments were resolved, but your vote was not changed - if you still oppose, can you advise me what else needs to be addressed? Thanks, Anthony (talk) 13:53, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

FLC comments
If you are interested, would you be able to give comments on my new FLC? I would really appreciated! Thanks! Also, I was wondering when you are going to promote lists? Do you check every weekend? I am asking since you are the only director promoting lists which I see it is pretty unfair to you and nominators. — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 17:45, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for promoting my list! I was wondering if you are still on board on reviewing my new FLC today? Also, are you good at grammar mistakes if you are? I have been working on 40th Daytime Emmy Awards and it has plenty grammar mistakes throughout the article and I was wondering if you could check it out today? — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 18:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * User:SoapFan12, please, please, please stop asking people to promote your lists. It's becoming really tiresome and won't work in your favour in the future.  There is no deadline.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * User:The Rambling Man. First of all, this is not of you're buisness. I was not speaking to you therefore you should of leave this conversation alone, this is just rude. I really so not appreciated this. Second of all, I absoutlety did not ask him to promote my lists and I never did. I just said, I think you should promote lists because I have seen lists that were worthy (giving him a little suggestion0. Please, please, please stop assuming stuff about me and start minding you're own buisness. It's becoming really tiresome. — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 20:04, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure, whatever. You really need to stop canvassing various people to get your stuff promoted.  All in good time.  The Rambling Man (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If either of you are reading this, I really hope that you take this discussion to your own talk pages and work things out there. SoapFan, you did say here: "I think you should promote some lists today, my list has been a month, with a high level of supports." Don't you see how that can be considered canvassing? You're specifically asking me to run through FLC in a way that figures to benefit you; in that way, you want me to promote your list. I understand being excited about the prospect of promotion, but by the fourth or fifth time you post on my talk page I get turned off. That said, the other directors haven't been doing closures that often recently (other than Hahc), so I decided to do closures around FLC (there's one withdrawal I still need to do). In the future, I'm not going to respond to pressure here to do FLC closures; there are supposed to be other people doing them, and if not that's not what I signed up for and someone else can do the community's dirty work. Please show some more patience with future FLCs, and forgive me if I don't get to review your other list today. There are other things that also need to get done (namely finishing that withdrawal), and it won't hurt the list's prospects if a few days pass before a pre-FLC review. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I am very sorry. I know I should not be seeing this but I feel that everyone is against me which you guys have the right to be because of my behavior. I am sorry and I did not see what I did. I did not mean to canvass and I was just giving a suggestion. However you guys run the FL process, therefore I should of left you guys to do you're jobs. Again, I apilogize and can we please forget about this and do a new start. Sometimes, I feel that people are ignoring me due to personal reasons and life. Sorry again. — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 22:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

1924 Rose Bowl FAC
Hello. Just letting you know that I have responded to your new concerns at the 1924 Rose Bowl FAC. Thanks for looking through the article again. - Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 23:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Just another friendly reminder. Thanks, - Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 00:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Done
Hey, just a quick note to let you know I've quit being FLC director, fed up with the snarky comments I find all over Wikipedia from various sources. I have other things going on in real life which overtrump this position, and I'm done with being made to feel I'm not "doing the job properly". Hope it works out well for you; time allowing, I may be around for a bit now and again. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:04, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

FL - Drama Series
I do not want to canvass, I am sorry however when you get a chance would you please respond to my comments on my FLC? Also, I want to know how to sign up to become a FL director or delegate? I do not want to become one, I am just curious. — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 19:35, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey there, Thanks for the respond, I have replied again to you're comments, can you get there when you have a chance? Also, I would like a respond on my question (I want to know how to sign up to become a FL director or delegate?) when you are able to, if that okay? — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 02:09, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have again replied to you're comments. I would really appreciated if you would take it look at the nomination page again. Than you so much! — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 23:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

62nd Oscars
Hi there.

I was wondering if you will be could proofread: Featured list candidates/62nd Academy Awards/archive1. Please note that because of some limitations on older Oscar ceremonies, this list follows the 1st Academy Awards format done by User:Tbhotch rather than others such like the 82nd Academy Awards and such. I understand your busy schedule (I usually wait two weeks until I ask you a request), but I would be grateful for the extra help and support. Thanks.
 * –Birdienest81 (talk) 17:50, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Re:FL Director
As I previously said I am not interested on a becoming a driector or delegate, I was just woundering, for further knowledge. However, you never know, I might change my mind. Is there a problem, with curiosity? — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 02:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Delegate election
Hey Giants. First, my apologies for not being as active as I should be, but I have put myself to full speed again. Now, I did not know that something like this, Featured list candidates/Delegate election, ever took place. I became a delegate after a long talk with TRM but he never mentioned that :)

Now, I have a few names in my head that are strong candidates to become FL delegates and I would like to share these names with you when I have them ready. I would also like to know if NapHit will still be a delegate. He did a great hob but he has been inactive as delegate (and barely active overall), since January. I know that he is on a one-year flight to Australia but I wanted yout input about it. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ  21  03:08, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have created this: User:Hahc21/2013 delegate elections. I think that we should hold an election for new FL and FLRC delegates. Thoughts? — ΛΧΣ  21  17:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The delegate election was when we had many more active (and productive) editors at FLC. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:07, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I can think of a couple of editors who would be good candidates for delegate (Crisco 1492, PresN, SchroCat, Status, Vensatry, Harrias). I thought we could ask one of them to present themselves for the post like I did back in February, but not sure. — ΛΧΣ  21  17:48, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

62nd Oscars
Hi there,

Just wanted to let you know that I fixed everything you listed in Featured list candidates/62nd Academy Awards/archive1. Thanks for the suggestions.
 * —Birdienest81 (talk) 03:48, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

TFL dates
Hi Giants, Hope all is good with you. Are you now the decision maker for TFL dates? I've got List of works by H. C. McNeile filed for a front page show at the moment, and was wondering if it's possible to consider the date closest to 28 September, which was McNeile's birthday. I see you already have something in for the closest day (List of 1930s jazz standards on September 30) and I'm also hoping to have the McNeile article as TFA, if I can get enough support at WP:Today's featured article/requests, both of which facts may mean that I'm going to be out of luck on that score. Is there a chance for the 30th, or have I left it too late? Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:55, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * ps. If you're not the decider of dates, can you point me in the direction of who is? Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks you so much for the pre-FLC review! That mean the world to me, for a minute I thought you forgot! LOL! Well, I have replied to you're comments, can you take a lot when you have a chance, please? Furthermore, do not forget to replied to me at my FLC. There is just one comments, that has to be talk about. Thank you so much for you're service in both lists! Thanks again! — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 03:30, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Citing sources using Proquest
Hello,

I have a quick question. How do I cite sources that are retrieved from an online database such as Proquest?
 * -Birdienest81 (talk) 18:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Lionel Palairet
Hi Giants, I come to you cap in hand, so to speak. I know you are exceptionally busy with FLC after TRM's resignation, but I wondered if you would consider carrying out a peer review on the Victorian-era cricketer Lionel Palairet? I have no yet listed the article for a peer review, as given the state of things there, I felt it would be better to have a reviewer lined up first. If you are willing then I will open such a review, and I would exceptionally grateful. However, if you are too tied up with other things at the moment, I would understand fully and certainly not hold it against you. Regards,  Harrias  talk 20:26, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have opened a peer review: Peer review/Lionel Palairet/archive1. I look forward to your thoughts.  Harrias  talk 06:35, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Respond to pre-FL comments
Hi there. I would really appreciated if you can get back at Talk:40th Daytime Emmy Awards. Thanks! — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 02:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have just replied again! Thanks a lot! I hope you can get back at it ASAP! — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 01:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

2012–13 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team
Because of your active involvement in Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive5 and Featured article candidates/Tommy Amaker/archive1, I thought you might be interested in commenting at Featured article candidates/2012–13 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for stopping by. I have responded to your concerns and look forward to further feedback.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:04, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have some supports so if you could complete your review that would give me a good chance to get this one passed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I could use further feedback to your most recent concerns.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Emmy featured lists
Hi there. Don't you think at Featured lists in Media the section, that the emmys featured lists deserved it own bullet point, like the Academy Awards ones? I mean Ex: Emmy Awards: Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Drama Series etc... What do you think? Also, do not forget to respond to me at Talk:40th Daytime Emmy Awards! lol, I do not want to sound annoying! — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 19:11, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Review
Hey, I know that you giving me review comments has led you to lose interest and regrets, which I am very sorry for. However I assure you, it will never repeated itself and to proove I have a new FLC ongoing and I was wondering if you take time to review it when you get a chance? I know it has only been up for 4 days but it does not hurt to ask, right? — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 01:43, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, I hope you got this message, if you did may you please respond on my talk page like you usually do? I would really appreciated! Thanks! — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 01:26, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

64th Oscars
Hi there.

I was wondering if you will be could proofread: Featured list candidates/64th Academy Awards/archive1. I understand your busy schedule (I usually wait ten days until I ask you a request), but I would be grateful for the extra help and support. Thanks.
 * ---Birdienest81 (talk) 17:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

FAC for Samuel Merrill Woodbridge
Thank you for your quick comment regarding an error on one of the footnotes there. If you did have a little time in the near future to come back and give it a second look (and perhaps eventually your support), I'd appreciate it. Nevertheless, thanks for your help. --ColonelHenry (talk) 12:41, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

64th Oscars
Hi there,

Just wanted to let you know that I fixed everything you listed in Featured list candidates/64th Academy Awards/archive1. Thanks for the suggestions.


 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 06:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Opened FAC review for 2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final
Just wanted to let you know that I've started an FAC review for 2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final. As you may remember, you were nice enough to help with the peer review of the article back in June. Unfortunately it has taken me a while to dedicate enough time to this article to feel comfortable nominating it for FAC. If you have time, would you mind reading the article again and providing additional feedback for it's improvement (or support for it's promotion). Thank you. --SkotyWATC 00:44, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing the article again. I've responded to all of the new issues you discovered (sorry for the delayed response).  Thanks again for taking the time to circle back and take a second pass through the article. --SkotyWATC 04:09, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

64th Oscars
Hi there,

I fixed the semicolon problem.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 01:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Election
Looks like nobody has opposed the idea, although I would have liked to see more comments. However, I am looking forward with starting the elections on Oct. 1 using this schedule. I will ask for and watchlist notices, as well as Signpost coverage. Any suggestions? — ΛΧΣ  21  03:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The proposal looks sound to me, although I'm not an expert on coordinating Wikipedia elections. If it were up to me, I'd probably choose to extend the voting period from 2 weeks to 3 weeks or a month, to give late-arriving editors more time to offer their opinions, but that may not be an issue. If the election works like the last one did, and the eventual winners become obvious, I doubt the two-week voting period will cause much controversy. We can always extend the period if two or more candidates are close in the !voting. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. In case there is a need, we can extend the voting period. Although, I will do my best to make sure the elections get as much publicity as possible. The watchlist notice is on track and same with the Signpost's. I will add the cent notice myself when the elections start and take care of all that could be needed :] However, if you give me a hand, it'll be very much appreciated. — ΛΧΣ  21  22:15, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Citing e-Book sources
Hi there,

I want to cite a book that is offered online/digital format. However, there are no page numbers. Yet I know this book is an actual one because if you search on WorldCat or other library catalogs, it shows that it does exist. How do I cite a source without its page number?
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 23:26, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. , —who has never participated in the competition before—and follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Hey
I hope this is not canvassing. I see that you archive one list but did not bother to look at others that need to wheather be promoted or archived. Don't get me wrong you do a great job and I respect that. I was just wondering why do did you only look at that list. Sorry, I really hope I do not get accuse of canvassing, I am just curious. — SoapFan12 (talk,  contribs ) 23:35, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * To proved my opinion these, ,, are all ready to be promoted. Again, just curious therefore please do not takie it in a wrong way. — SoapFan12 (talk,   contribs ) 23:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

1924 Rose Bowl, again
Hello Giants2008,

I have yet again nominated my article, 1924 Rose Bowl, at FAC (nom page here). Because you reviewed the article previously, I was wondering if you would be willing to look at it again. I have addressed all of your concerns on your previous review, so there have been no changes to the article. Much appreciated, - Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 04:09, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review. I have addressed all of the concerns you brought up. Much appreciated, - Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 02:35, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

2007 Appalachian State vs. Michigan football game
Hey, I just want to pop in and let you know that I have responded to all your comments here. Thanks for giving them!  Toa   Nidhiki05  22:08, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: Snow in Florida
The refs for the article look to be in good shape, actually, so I think it's good to go! --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 04:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

68th Oscars
Hi there.

I was wondering if you will be could proofread: Featured list candidates/68th Academy Awards/archive1. I understand that the Featured list delegates election is slowing down the process and keeping you busy (I usually wait ten days until I ask you a request), but I just want some feedback on grammatical errors or contents and I would be grateful for the extra help and support. Thanks.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 22:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)