User talk:Guoguo12/Archive 3

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Atlanta ACR
Hi Guoguo12, I have closed the Battle of Atlanta A-class review as not having the required consensus for promotion to A-class. Military history project ACRs are generally kept open for 28 days during which time at least three editors need to explicitly support an article for promotion. Given that the article did not have this support and had been open for 31 days it could not be promoted. I hope this won't discourage you from continuing to improve the article, though. You are able to renominate the article for ACR at a later date when you feel it is ready (there is no minimum timeframe for this). It might be best to nominate for a peer review before going through ACR, though, as this might help elicit more comments to make the next ACR easier. Currently we are experiencing a shortage of reviewers at ACR, which is making it difficult for articles to achieve the required support, so if you feel like getting involved with reviewing it would help clear the backlog that has built up and might make it easier for your ACR next time (as our reviewers would be free to concentrate on your ACR). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:17, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * What he said ... we're going through a bit of a dry period at ACR, as several of our most active reviewers have been helping out with RL natural disasters. I'm not the best judge, but I thought it needed a bit more work ... a wider variety of sources might be helpful, and it wouldn't hurt to compare the text carefully against the sources.  There would be no harm in putting it through a peer review. - Dank (push to talk) 01:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks guys. I'll see what I can do, though I've probably used all possible internet-accessible resources by now. Guoguo12  --Talk--  02:03, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Lead Coordinator
I noticed Mono has, apparently, permanently left (see here). I guess you should take over as lead now. Unfortunately, it dosen't look like he'll be coming back this time. Best of luck, Sumsum2010 · T · C  03:05, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I was going to ask the same thing on the Project talk page until I saw that Sumsum had already commented here. If its alright with Sumsum, I think you should temporarily take over, at least for the foreseeable future.  Nolelover  It's almost football season!  12:40, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 'Tis a true pity, but very well, I'll step in. Thanks for contacting me. I'll update the coordination page. Guoguo12  --Talk--  19:33, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a heads-up that your article will be published this coming Monday, so you might want to update the coordinators' info on the project's home page. – SMasters (talk) 06:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I have updated the project pages. Thanks. Guoguo12  --Talk--  13:31, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * As a side note concerning the article, could we possibly link to it on our home page after it comes out? I think it would be a great way for new members to learn in a few minutes the nuances of the Project which can sometimes take weeks to fully understand.  Nolelover  It's almost football season!  17:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it would be good to permanently link to it. Sumsum2010 · T · C  19:31, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * After its publication, I will put a Signpost templated banner on the project's talk page. – SMasters (talk) 02:43, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 March newsletter
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is with 231 points, who leads Pool H.  (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see WikiCup/Scoring.

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Table tennis WikiProject coordination
Cialo (talk) 13:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello Guoguo12. We would need your help on table tennis pages. In particular, we now have the pages for the Latin American Table Tennis Union and for the Latin American Table Tennis Championships. However the latter still need some updates. Moreover, the next step is to do the same for the North America. Do you think you can help in creating these pages ? You could use the Latin America related page as a model... In particular we would need:


 * A page for the North American Table Tennis Union
 * A page for the North American Table Tennis Championships

You could find all the required information on the ITTF website and on its statistics section http://www.ittf.com/ittf_stats/

let me know... asap :)
 * Sorry, I'm not sure I can do it (I didn't even know there was a North American Table Tennis Union). Guoguo12  --Talk--  20:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * lol, no problems... let me know if you would collaborate in table tennis topic so that we could coordinate our activities. As an example there is the necessity to addresse the indications of the reviewer to make the table tennis a good article. Cialo (talk) 21:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for keeping me "in the loop" (assuming you get the table tennis pun). I might take another look at the table tennis article after I finish what I'm working on now (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization). Guoguo12  --Talk--  21:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * ok thank you vey much... Cialo (talk) 15:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 03:45, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Guoguo12  --Talk--  15:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

A good time to fix this...
I would appreciate your input here. This needs to be clarified and will probably keep popping up every drive, and now is as good a time as any to clear it up.  Nolelover  It's almost football season!  22:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for alerting me. (Sorry, I wasn't watching the page.) Guoguo12  --Talk--  01:03, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

TC
TC has been blocked as a suspected sock of Tobias Conradi. See new proposal for a category tree at WT:TWP. Mjroots (talk) 09:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note, although I think I'll pass on participating in the track gauge discussion (sorry, I know absolutely nothing about train tracks). Guoguo12  --Talk--  19:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to and  who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 19:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Translation
Thanks for appending that link to the translation from Finnish. Saved me time loading my translator. Not the best translation I've seen, but good enough. I checked it against Estonian afterwards, just out of curiosity. It looked even worse there.... Peridon (talk) 19:42, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. :) Guoguo12  --Talk--  19:43, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

SEATO
GabrielF (talk) 03:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: spelling
"Affect," as a noun, means an emotional response or feeling. "Effect" is the more commonly used noun, meaning the result of some cause, but that's not the right word here. The anon editor introduced a grammatical error. (ESkog)(Talk) 21:01, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, okay. I didn't know that. Guoguo12  --Talk--  21:04, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify
Just wanted to say Thank You for organizing the drives, and for giving out the prizes. :) Cheers, Fang Aili talk 03:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for your hard work! :) Guoguo12  --Talk--  16:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Maree National School
Hi. Just letting  you  know that  the non  notable school  you  PRODed has been redirected to  its locality  per standard practice. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for the note. and I were discussing it.  Guoguo12  --Talk--  19:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Revert in Marlene Jennings
I restored the revert you made to Marlene Jennings concerning her visual disability. The edit had a citation. The question of the participation of people disabilities in politics is relevant. May I ask what your reason was for reverting this edit? - Montréalais (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Good catch. Thanks for notifying me about this; the revert appears to have been made in error, but here's what probably ran through my mind as I made the revert. The IP user who made the reverted edit added a test image to the top of the page in that same edit . This alone definitely does not deserve rollback. However, the information about the blindness seemed dubious and harmful, and per WP:BLP, dubious information should be removed immediately. Note that the source is in French (I think), and I don't read French, so it all seemed very fishy. I think that the dubiousness, coupled with the unfair reputation of IP users, led me to make the revert. Anyway, the revert was made in error. Guoguo12  --Talk--  23:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The Wikifier: March 2011
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 01:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC).

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:33, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

dude
dont report my stuff not cool —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edgarbautista1234590 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Assuming you are referring to your creation, Quickscoping, please understand that Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Thanks. Guoguo12  --Talk--  14:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you, for the help and the time spent. CrimsonSabbath (talk) 00:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem! Glad I could help. Guoguo12  --Talk--  00:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Polytrichum juniperinum
The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

June 2011 Wikification Drive
Sumsum2010 · T · C 04:11, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

mail
--Lexein (talk) 00:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

YGM
 Nolelover  It's almost football season!  16:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

User:SilenceFallsNightCalls‎
Hi, I guess I should have left a better explanation about my decline of that speedy. As a userpage, even if it has been blanked by the author, there's no need to delete it unless it contains content that really shouldn't be there. And, perhaps the user just wants it blank rather than deleted. Sorry for any inconvenience! —DoRD (talk) 20:00, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for clarifying, though I'm still not certain about whether or not the page should be tagged. As you can see from the history page, the author of the page (also the user who blanked the page) is not the "owner", so to speak, of the userpage. Still, according to WP:G7, it would seem that G7 applies to all pages "other than a userspace page or category page", though the description does not elaborate on tagging userpages. Guoguo12   (Talk)  20:06, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I must apologize for completely missing the fact that the page creator is someone else! I'm not sure how I overlooked that, but I'll delete the page right away. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 20:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. Of course, WP:G7 still seems kind of vague. Guoguo12   (Talk)  20:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * As for G7, the way I see it: This was a clear case where G7 applied. If a user blanks their own user page, I'd leave it alone. (NOTE TO SELF: Compare the author and the user page name next time.) You might also want to take a look at WP:UP for more guidance. —DoRD (talk) 20:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

It's simply that the wording at WP:G7 is vague: "If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page or category page, this can be taken as a deletion request." "Userspace page" is presumably only supposed to refer to user talk pages. Guoguo12  (Talk)  23:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 May newsletter
We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by, and  respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.

A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Drive's goal
Sumsum notified, BTW.  Nolelover  Talk / Contribs 

Hey Guoguo, quick question about the drive's goal. Should we think about AWB'ing a notice out, maybe halfway though, "challenging" (rather then just moving the goal up) our participants to get another 500 off the books?  Nolelover  Talk / Contribs  00:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Things seem to be going too well now. Guoguo12   (Talk)  02:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a nice challenge. If the 500 were to be met, maybe give everyone who participated in the 500 a bonus barnstar. Sumsum2010 · T · C  02:29, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, I've looked over a few of the articles done, especially by the newer members, and they generally look pretty good. At this rate (500 done every four days), we'd have this backlog goooooone. Anyway, my $.02: don't make the extension seem like we're just using them while we have their attention (that's why I specified "challenging" them), and don't burn them out with, like 2k more - participation will slow down as we go on.  Nolelover  Talk · Contribs  02:30, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sumsum2010, I don't think there's any way of distinguishing between participating users and non-participating ones.  Guoguo12   (Talk)  02:34, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * For the bonus, we could just note the amount they have at the beginning of the challenge,and the amount at the end. Sumsum2010 · T · C  03:12, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Will that work? I think it's a bit too complicated. What say you, Nolelover? Guoguo12   (Talk)  03:13, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well...TBH...I'm not much of a fan of using barnstars any more then necessary. Too many sort of ruin the whole concept. Are they a good reward for the drives? Yes. Should we just hand them out for every extra little task? IMO, no. However, that's really more about my attitude toward barnstar's, and less about the actual idea. It seems rather hard to do, but ya'll are the co'ords. (I so did not just ditch this right back to you guys ;))  Nolelover  Talk · Contribs  03:52, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe just an extra sentence on the barnstar they'll already be getting. Sumsum2010 · T · C  04:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Is that a good incentive? Guoguo12   (Talk)  15:22, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't really think that we need more "incentives". If they can rip through 1000 in around 10 days, then I don't think that 500 more over 20 days is extremely tough. That's why I specify "challenging" them - its purely voluntary, especially after the original goal has been met.  Nolelover  Talk · Contribs  16:30, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This month's group does not seem to need much incentive, they've gone through in 4 days what the October drive took a month to do. The extra 500 would probably vanish in a few days, even without incentive. Sumsum2010 · T · C 18:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, likely. Now all we need to do is bury this conversation.  Guoguo12   (Talk)  20:04, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:Edit summaries
I agree with this edit, but we should use only policy based language, such as "not yet notable" or "no article yet" in edit summaries. --Lexein (talk) 02:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I must disagree. "Significance", or "why the subject is important", is used in policy; it is different than notability because it represents a standard lower than notability. See WP:A7. Guoguo12   (Talk)  18:39, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Two quick questions
Hi there, I am currently taking part in your wikify June drive, also my first. I have been looking at the edits by some of the other editors, particularly those scaling the top of the leader board as it is, to see if i can find ways to speed up my own wikifying technique. My questions are in relation to some edit's i have spotted. Take this article for example Morrissey Hearing by current board leader User:Kerowyn. The article is relatively small but could have been improved further rather than adding a bullet point next to the reference and counting it as wikified. For a start there could have been more wikilinks added such as "testify" and "custody", as an example. Please do not misunderstand as i am not trying to point a finger, but simply find out for myself if simple motions such as this count as wikifying an article. If this is so, it may help my own ranking on the leaderboard. Another question i would like to ask is on articles containing only 1 or 2 sentences is it allowed to just link 2 or 3 words and count it as wikified if it is not eligible for an infobox etc? This also seems to be quite a popular way of wikifying. Thanks for your help.

 B a i l o 26  23:57, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for pointing out the edits by . I'll remind the editor to be more careful in wikifying, look over (or someone will) the users edits, and possibly disqualify any not fully wikified articles until they are fully wikified. As for the second question, on "articles containing only 1 or 2 sentences", yes adding just two or three links is okay as long as it is thorough—if it can be linked, it should be, bearing in mind the exceptions at WP:OVERLINK. Guoguo12   (Talk)  02:13, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * After scanning through the user's log, I found that most of the articles completed were appropriately wikified. Morrissey Hearing is okay—words like "testify" and "custody" are nearly plain English words, which should not be wikified per WP:OVERLINK. If the user had linked "testify" and "custody", that would have been okay as well. Guoguo12   (Talk)  15:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The only issue I found with the user's work, and Guoguo, you might want to mention this, is the failure to link the definition of the article. In other words, what was the Morrissey Hearing? It was a "legal proceeding". That should have been linked, if nothing else. As a general rule, x should always be linked in the format "(Article title) is an x", or "(Article title), born DOB, was an x". Those should always be linked, and I noticed that Kerowyn didn't always do that.  Nolelover  Talk · Contribs  15:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay Nolelover, good point. I've notified the user about the stuff before but do go ahead and add the definition stuff, too. Guoguo12   (Talk)  15:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, and thanks for bringing this to our attention Bailo.  Nolelover  Talk · Contribs  15:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I just read your message and clearly you're better at this than I am. It took me a long time to come up with words that didn't sound too harsh. But I forgot to use a smiley . Guoguo12   (Talk)  15:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, I've got some RL experience in that sort of thing, and yes, smileys make even the worst criticism bearable. ;)  Nolelover  Talk · Contribs  15:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi all! Thanks for the help. It's good to know what I've been doing wrong. It happens not infrequently that all that is left to do is remove the wikify tag, especially if the article is a stub to begin with. The solar eclipse articles were almost all like that. K e rowyn Leave a note 17:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Automatic build and deployment documentum dar composer
Hello Guoguo12. I am just letting you know that I deleted Automatic build and deployment documentum dar composer, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. —DoRD (talk) 02:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Back for more? I originally tagged the page for deletion under A1, which you deleted the page under. However, you'll find that A1 "applies only to very short articles". I'd say no content (A3) is more like it. The page very clearly had not content on it—only coding of some sort which I did not attempt to identify. I also threw in G1, "patent nonsense", for good measure. It looked like "incoherent text or gibberish" to me—both, for that matter. But anyway, there's always WP:SNOW and WP:NOT, right?  Guoguo12   (Talk)  03:07, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it wasn't "very short", so perhaps my rationale didn't exactly fit, either. It was XML code for something I wasn't able to identify, so it wasn't nonsense, per se. In any case, if the author disagrees, they are welcome to appeal it. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 03:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:Milestones
Your analysis was spot on. I apologise for any inconvenience, it should be fixed now. I really should have given the script a once-over after your last message... sigh. Ah well. Thanks also to Bdk for fixing. - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 12:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Jarry1250. In any case, if it wasn't for your bot, the page would be completely devoid of interesting or useful information. Guoguo12   (Talk)  14:50, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

#2
Just saw it on my watchlist. Good luck!  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  15:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * What? Really? You're actually watching that page? I didn't even transclude it correctly! But anyway, thanks! { Guoguo12   (Talk)  15:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * (I watch User:X!/Tally) Good luck. -- The Σ talkcontribs 21:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. . Guoguo12   (Talk)  00:34, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, don't hold your breaths, guys. I'll be too busy to start the RfA until tomorrow. Guoguo12   (Talk)  22:49, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * * Releases breath, passes out* Hurry up! :D But in all seriousness, do make sure that you have plenty of time to devote to this - RfA is not a good week to be on WP for a minimal amount of time. And yes, I was actually watching the page. Added it a few weeks ago - wanted to know as soon as anything happened. :)  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  23:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, see WP:RFA. Guoguo12   (Talk)  22:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Your RFA
Good luck with your RFA. I know you'd do well with the mop. –BuickCenturyDriver 23:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Guoguo12   (Talk)  23:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
You have  new messages ( last change ). / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)