User talk:Giants2008/Archive 29

Your GA nomination of 1938–39 Oregon Webfoots men's basketball team
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1938–39 Oregon Webfoots men's basketball team 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 Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1938–39 Oregon Webfoots men's basketball team
The article 1938–39 Oregon Webfoots men's basketball team 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:1938–39 Oregon Webfoots men's basketball team for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 16:40, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1938–39 Oregon Webfoots men's basketball team
The article 1938–39 Oregon Webfoots men's basketball team you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1938–39 Oregon Webfoots men's basketball team 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 Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 00:01, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

closing of featured list nom?
Why was this nomination closed? I continued working on the article, but the reviewer never responded. Was it my fault for not mentioning on the review page when I finished making the changes?-- 3family6 ( Talk to me  &#124;  See what I have done  ) 05:20, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Today's featured article/July 6, 2016
Hi Giants, would you like to take a whack at this? I don't think I could do it justice in 1075 to 1175 characters. - Dank (push to talk) 00:13, 20 June 2016 (UTC) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:34, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: List of best-selling albums in the United Kingdom

 * I've added a further update of this issue at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/submissions. A Thousand Doors (talk &#124; contribs) 11:09, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Yankees History
Thank you for replying to my post. I was unaware of the controversy surrounding the beginning of the Yankees franchise. I thought someone had just made a mistake in editing on Wikipedia. I saw that baseball-reference, in the last few years, made the change of recognizing the original Orioles and Yankees as two different franchises. Before that, however, they recognized the two as the same franchise, and that's probably where I got my info from. I really have no reliable source on my side, so I'll have to back off, although my opinion is still the same.50.136.139.204 (talk) 06:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

The Baseball-Almanac website still lists them as one continuous franchise, but that might not be enough.50.136.139.204 (talk) 08:28, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * That's a little lower on the reliability scale than many of the sources that split them anyway. I don't think the FAC folks would look kindly upon using it, for example. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 13:07, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Proof-reading and pre-FLC review
Hey, I want to thank you again for proof-reading Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Special Guest Performer in a Drama Series, it meant so much! and it was truly appreciated! I was wondering if it was possible for you to do the same with Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Game Show Host, a page I recently revamped? Do you mind to correct all the mistakes, help modify sentences to make the article have more sense and thst are stronger? Also, give me some feedback? I understand you are busy person, and if you can not do it, please do not feel need to! I do not want to bother you! Thank you and hope you are enjoying your summer vacation! Thanks again! I might later on nominated the article for a FL, so maybe you can also do a Pre-FLC review for me? Again, if you can do it, that's great! If you can not, that's fine! Thank you! — JJakathestrength (talk,  contribs ) 16:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

FLC review request
Hi! Since you participated in a previous similar FLC, I would like to request you to review the List of Padma Bhushan award recipients (1980–89) as well and give your comments here. Thanks! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

FLC delegate changes
I'd do this over email but Giants doesn't have one linked, so if you (Giants) want to move the discussion there feel free. Given that Gavin (SchroCat) is leaving at the end of October, and Chris (Crisco 1492) hasn't closed a nomination since August 2015, we're a couple months away from having only 2 people working on things at FLC. As I mentioned at the FLC talkpage, that's a problem- we had a pack of 10+ nominations at the bottom of the queue with 2 reviews each for a few weeks, which was fixed by me reviewing them... but there has to be someone else to promote them, according to the current rules/norms, and 6 just stalled out even though they were ready to be promoted. Changing it so that we can promote nominations that we've reviewed alleviates this a bit, but ideally I think we need more delegates. Probably 2 to replace Gavin and, honestly, Chris. You two were brought on in late 2013 through elections, and since I took 3rd place I got added in mid 2015 after a brief ratification. I don't think that any of us would be comfortable extending that to the last 3 candidates from that ballot, both in terms of time elapsed and the votes they got, so I think the options are to either run another election or just pick someone to be ratified. I don't have anyone in mind; do y'all? Do you have any other ideas? -- Pres N  02:36, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree on not going to the election results. The three that became delegates had 100% ratification with good numbers behind them, the three that didn't make it had low levels of votes going in. There is possibly one name I could think of (I'd rather not name them in public without at least one other person chippping in beforehand to confirm they think they are OK), but outside the private nomination route (which I think is how the FAC delegates have been selected recently) the election route seems to be the best. Cheers - Gavin (talk) 07:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but between the BS over September Morn and starting a doctorate degree, I have had reduced time and interest for Wikipedia. I agree that it is best to find someone to replace me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * And Gavin, if you're thinking the person I'm thinking, he'll be okay. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to hear about this, Gavin. These are the horrible things that happen when I go on a break! :-( I'm on board with the idea of an election. It's been long enough since the last one that it makes sense to just do a new one and open the field to a new generation of FLC contributors who are interested in the job. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 02:12, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Email one of us and we'll copy you on the conversation we've been having off-wiki about this. -- Pres N  03:08, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * ... -- Pres N  00:14, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't do anything related to Wikipedia by email. Anything good enough for me to hear is good enough for the rest of the community. That's been my belief since joining Wikipedia, and I'm sticking to it come hell or high water. Sorry, but I just don't do well with off-Wiki business. It's a rabbit hole I'd rather not go down for a variety of reasons. If you're serious about a particular candidate, let them know and bring it up on FLC talk so we can have a !vote. If not, I trust you guys to come up with a good election format to bring to FLC when the time comes. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 01:07, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * That's reasonable, I just didn't know it was deliberate. The discussion was just that Gavin had two editors he wanted to propose directly, which Chris and I agreed with; I wanted to know if you were fine with us talking to them and proposing them directly at WT:FLC like I was, or if you wanted an election regardless. I wanted it off-wiki so that your opinion of the specific editors didn't have to be public prior to any proposition. Sounds like you're fine with it, so I'll follow up with the two editors and propose them to the community, and if one or both declines I'll make an election setup. -- Pres N  21:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of members of the 14th Parliament of Pakistan/archive1
Sorry for bothering you but I would greatly appreciate it if you kindly give me some feedback on this list. This list is ready in my opinion. --Saqib (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Featured article candidate: Unlocked (Alexandra Stan album)
Hi there! My mean is not to bother you, but I was wondering if you could find time to comment on my FAC above and even support or oppose to it. Best regards, Cartoon network freak (talk) 11:56, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Re: List of New York Mets seasons
Thank you for your feedback.

I'm not quite sure what the issue was with the edits I made, considering what I did made it look more like the vast majority of other teams list of seasons pages. Most other teams bold the years when the won the division, pennant and World Series (see List of Atlanta Braves seasons for example). IMO, that makes it look nicer, it helps it stand out. I removed the links to MLB seasons overall in each column because it isn't really necessary to include it, about half of the other pages don't have it either. The symbols that indicate wild card, division, pennant and World Series look junky; and most other teams don't have them on their pages. Finally, almost every other team I've seen bolds the word won when they win a playoff series in a particular season.

I'm not trying to argue here, but I'm not quite understanding the inconsistency here? Bbob221 (talk) 23:08, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Eega/archive2
This candidate is open since the first of September. It could gain benefit from few constructive comments. Would you like to provide some? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:29, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Unlocked (Alexandra Stan album)
Hi there! You have left comments on my FAC above, but could you return in order to support or oppose to my nomination? This would be appreciated. Best regards, Cartoon network freak (talk) 05:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

PR request
I know you're not an avid follower of cricket, but would you be interested in taking part in this PR? Thanks, &mdash; Vensatry (talk) 18:07, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 November newsletter: Final results
The final round of the 2016 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2016 WikiCup top three finalists:
 * First Place -
 * Second Place -
 * Third Place -

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:
 * Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a three-way tie with themselves for two FAs in each of R2, R3, and R5).
 * Good Article – MPJ-DK had 14 GAs promoted in R3.
 * Featured List – produced 2 FLs in R2
 * Featured Pictures – Adam Cuerden restored 18 images to FP status in R4.
 * Featured Portal – produced the only FPO of the Cup in R2.
 * Featured Topic – and Calvin were each responsible for one FT in R3 and R2, respectively.
 * Good Topic – MPJ-DK created a GT with 9 GAs in R5.
 * Did You Know – MPJ-DK put 53 DYKs on the main page in R4.
 * In The News – and, each with 5 ITN, both in R4.
 * Good Article Review – MPJ-DK completed 61 GARs in R2.

Over the course of the 2016 WikiCup the following content was added to Wikipedia (only reporting on fixed value categories): 17 Featured Articles, 183 Good Articles, 8 Featured Lists, 87 Featured Pictures, 40 In The News, and 321 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2017 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. ,, and

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for 1966 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship Game
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Rajinikanth filmography/archive2
Requesting your input here. Regards. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me 10:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Inconsistency with the MLB team season pages
Hi. Thank you for your comments. My edits were simply trying to bring the page in line with the other MLB teams list of seasons pages. I understand there may be certain "standards", but they seem to be very inconsistently applied and it is really starting to get on my nerves. I and a friend of mine (User:Bbob221) have been trying to bring the Yankees, Mets and Blue Jays season pages to look like most of the rest of them and are constantly being rebuffed by you and several other users, who are claiming it's not following the Manual of Style guidelines, amongst other things.

Yet, this same standard is not applied to most other MLB team season pages (say the Red Sox seasons, for example). As I said, most teams pages look more in line with the edits I was making. I would like to get to the bottom of why my (and Bbob221's) edits are being reverted on the Yankees, Mets and Blue Jays pages, but other teams pages can have what I was doing. Thank you. NBA2020 (talk) 01:44, 20 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for clearing up the confusion. I was under the impression that it was more of a personal preference thing rather than a standard, as I notice that the other pages on the featured list process (other than the Yankees, Mets and Blue Jays) are all in the style we were doing. I (and Bbob221) apologize for any unproductive "editing wars" we may have started. While we do not agree with some of the MoS guidelines for team season pages, we will respect them going forward and will not make any further edits to team pages that run afoul of them. We will suggest that perhaps you guys may want to better clarify what the MoS for those kinds of pages are and work on revising the other MLB team pages back to meet them. Again, thank you! NBA2020 (talk) 18:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Cliff Clinkscales FAC
Hi Giants, I wonder if you'd mind giving this the once-over -- it's kind of stalled but there are several supporting comments (and one opposing) and you might be able to push things along... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:28, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

re Pop Warner
Thank you for all of your input. My question is re official looking over the content, do you know when we should expect it? Is there a system? Thanks again oh so very much. Rybkovich (talk) 19:30, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup December newsletter: WikiCup 2017
On 1 January 2017, WikiCup 2017 (the 10th Annual WikiCup) will begin. This year we are trying something a little different – monetary prizes.

For the WC2017 the prizes will be as follows (amounts are based in US$ and will be awarded in the form of an online Amazon gift certificate):
 * First place – $200
 * Second & Third place – $50 each
 * Category prizes – $25 per category (which will be limited to FA, FL, FP, GA, and DYK for 2017). Winning a category prize does not require making it to the final round.

Note: Monetary prizes are a one-year experiment for 2017 and may or may not be continued in the future. In order to be eligible to receive any of the prizes above, the competing Wikipedia account must have a valid/active email address. After two years as a WikiCup judge, Figureskatingfan is stepping down. We thank her for her contributions as a WikiCup judge. We are pleased to announce that our newest judge is two-time WikiCup champion Cwmhiraeth.

The judges for the 2017 WikiCup are, , and.

Signups are open now and will remain open until 5 February 2017. You can sign up here.

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Game of Thrones (season 1)/archive2
Thank you for your actionable and appropriate feedback. I apologize for the delay, but have substantially addressed everything, I think, and would appreciate your review of the revised list article and further feedback. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 21:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, ready for re-review. Thanks again! Jclemens (talk) 01:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

2014 Japanese Grand Prix
I wonder if I could ask a little favour. 2014 Japanese Grand Prix is well on the way in its FAC (here) with a few supports. I can't remember if you know much about F1 (and it has had a review by an F1 person), but I'd like another pair of sports eyes on it if possible, particularly on the prose side. Any help greatly appreciated! Sarastro1 (talk) 01:02, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!
From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:01, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

SvG clean-up
In the recent discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive941 you supported mass-deletion of all BLP articles created by SvG. The closing decision was that this should be done. I have started a page at User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up for discussion / coordination of the deletion job. Your comments or suggestions would be welcome. Also, we urgently need volunteers with the technical skills to create a useable list of articles to be deleted. Any suggestions would be welcome. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 13:01, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

RfA
Hi Giants, I hope you are having a happy new year. I took care of deleting Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Meghan Trainor/archive1 as you requested at WT:FLC... but really, there's no reason that you shouldn't be able to do this kind of thing yourself. I saw in your talk page archives various editors have suggested you run at RfA over the years. Just being FLC Director, editing content that goes on the main page, should alone constitute the "need for the tools" RfA voters like to throw around. I think you would be a shoo-in, but if you want you could nominate yourself at WP:ORCP and see what they say there. If you do decide to run, I would be more than happy to provide an endorsement, although I'm sure you can find editors more prominent than me who would also be willing to nominate. –Grondemar 16:32, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

2003 CWC
Hi Giants, since you took part extensively in the PR, I thought you might be interested in the FAC. The coords would like a few non-cricketers to have a look. Thanks, &mdash; Vensatry (talk) 07:52, 7 January 2017 (UTC)