User talk:Juliancolton/Archive 29

Severe weather article reformatting
One of the editors called me back for ideas regarding this article. Since I've been away from the article for a while, I saw it with fresh perspective. I think we went about things in a way that was too complicated last year. This morning, I simplified the format. I'd be interested in your opinion as to whether this reorganization improved the article or not, since you're a member of the severe weather project. There's no big rush on this. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:26, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the look. Thegreatdr (talk) 00:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

One Man, One Woman
Hello Juliancolton. You seem to have deleted this article ages ago, since it had been considered not notable enough then. I would appreciate if you provided me (anyhow: by e-mail, in my userspace, or on ATW) the latest revision of the page before its deletion so that I could have a look at it. Recently I've read that this song was issued somewhere as a single, so maybe I'll find extra sources and rewrite it. Regards, Qweedsa (talk) 17:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I could temporarily restore it and move it to your userspace, if that's acceptable. Juliancolton  &#124;  talk  14:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes please, to e.g. User:Qweedsa/temp. — Qweedsa (talk) 15:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Juliancolton (talk) 16:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 31 May 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 22:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Talkpage protection
No, that's absolutely fine – in fact, just a couple of days ago, I was having a clearout of my "IPs'" subpage and thinking what a nuisance it was! Best, ╟─TreasuryTag► presiding officer ─╢ 17:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

deleted public domain images
Did you have an opinion on all the public domain images being deleted because the source statement is inadequate. The discussion is on my talk page. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't. I'm not really good with historical files in any case, which is why I commented only on the photograph. Juliancolton (talk) 18:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Revolution Parkour.
Hello, I am Omega, I was given permission by Adam Dunlap; founder of Revolution Parkour to create a wiki page, I am still trying to figure out how this works but I was hoping that you would allow me to do so. If there is anything you wish to ask or commment on then by all means do so. I will try to cite my sources but keep in mind 80% of the material will be from Adams mouth itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omegauser9 (talk • contribs) 19:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. In general, we advise against editing articles where you have a personal conflict of interest. Please also be mindful that plagiarism is not allowed, and all content must be original, except in special circumstances. Additionally, all articles must meet notability requirements by citing several relevant and credible sources. Thanks, Juliancolton (talk) 19:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

thank you for your quikc response Julian, I have found some published source material and some first hand accounts from the owner and creator of Revolution Parkour, with your permission I would like to create the page. sorry for any inconvenience.

Edit request
Today's featured article/June 3, 2010 – Banksia prionotes needs italics. Thanks (and good to see you back), Dabomb87 (talk) 16:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. Good to be back! Juliancolton (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Because of Phet threating to at least rival Gonu it might be good to make the blurb a bit more general.Jason Rees (talk) 18:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Another request: Today's featured article/June 5, 2010 – Banksia prionotes and The Beatles: Rock Band need italics. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 13:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Juliancolton (talk) 14:23, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Favour requested
I am temporarily fulfilling the Ealdgyth role at FAC, by carrying out basic sourcing and referencing checks. Since no one else is active in this area at the moment my own candidate, Symphony No. 8 (Mahler), hasn't had its references looked at. I wonder whether I could ask you to visit FAC and "do an Ealdgyth" on the article? I don't think there are any problems with the sources, but one never knows. I'd appreciate your help, if it's possible. Brianboulton (talk) 15:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course. I'll take a look right away. Juliancolton (talk) 15:56, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. Best of luck with the FAC. Juliancolton (talk) 16:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Commons
So, please define "steadily". I don't have a specific schedule for editing there, but I regularly do things there. Please review my contributions there and let me know what you think. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WikiProject Japan ! 08:28, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I meant that (before yesterday) your most recent contributions went back a couple months, which would, just as it would here, be considered too inactive for adminship. I've actually checked your contribs page a few times in the past to see if you were ready for an RfA, since I saw you had an unsuccessful one a few years ago. Good luck, Juliancolton (talk) 11:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Cool!
Thanks for your kind words - Dincher and I are slowly working on Ricketts Glen State Park. Ganoga Lake and the Clemuel Ricketts Mansion are both tied up in the history of the park (and would have been part of it, had the state been able to spend more in 1957 when the Ricketts family sold their last large holdings). I just got a fairly new biography of Colonel R. Bruce Ricketts and as am I reading it have found a few more nuggest to add to each of the FAs. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good luck with that article. Let me know if I'm able to help review or copyedit it when you get closer to FAC time! Juliancolton (talk) 18:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Review of closure process 2 results
Hi, because you contributed to FPC's recent review, I'm letting you know that the results of the poll have been posted. We appreciate your contributions to the first stage and hope you take part in this next step, here, to move towards implementing several changes to the process. Regards,  Mae din\ talk 18:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Homeschooling Roll Call
Hello, ! You are receiving this message because you are on WikiProject Homeschooling's list of members. WikiProject Homeschooling is holding a roll call to identify active members. All members will be listed under "Pending". Please move your name to "Active" or "Inactive" based on your ability or interest in contributing to the project. After two weeks all names still listed under "Pending" will be moved to "Inactive". If you are actively interested in participating, we are in the process of trying to revive the project and would welcome any help. Discussion can be found at the project talk page. Cheers! 21:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!
Juliancolton - Thank for your participation and support in my RfA.

I can honestly say that your comments and your trust in me are greatly appreciated.

Please let me know if you ever have any suggestions for me as an editor, or comments based on my admin actions.

Thank you! 7 23:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good luck. Juliancolton (talk) 02:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

HS at it again
Rather than cause another edit war and get blocked again I'll just take it to you now. Take a look at this, this, and this. HS is baiting me and trolling Malleus. Furthermore he remove my own comment in violation of policy while I removed his since his was an obvious attack. He also marked all of his edits minor.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 02:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going to try not to get involved, but that was a case where you probably should have left well enough alone, with all due respect. Not to be rude, but Malleus, as with all established users, is capable of dealing with issues on his own talk page. Juliancolton (talk) 02:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right. It's just that a statement like that got under my now thick skin a bit [redacted]. so I reverted and of course he came back in baited me. So Instead of another February 11 incident I just went to you. Thanks,-- White Shadows stood on the edge 03:00, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That got under your skin? That was comparatively mild! Juliancolton (talk) 03:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * no I worded that wrong. I felt like HS was trying to attack MF or at the very least get a mean reply from him. In an attmept to save a nasty exchange of words I reverted him. It had nothing to do with me, I really could'nt care less about the situation. I was just loking out for Malleus so to speak :)-- White Shadows stood on the edge 03:04, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Aw, you're cute when you're angry. As a consolation prize, how about a CD of 80's hits played on the world's smallest violin? Unfortunately, due to string size the music is subsonic and essentially results in thirty minutes of silence, but dogs and cats should find it cool.


 * Well, dogs, anyway; cats have no style when it comes to music. Half  Shadow  06:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

CU RFC
Consider looking over some new options (1 to 18) listed. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll look tomorrow or Monday. Cheers. Juliancolton (talk) 02:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Someone removed them all, calling it disruptive, when they themselves were the disruptive ones. Some of them had comments of support or oppose. Removing votes can lead to being blocked. Prodego was the one who removed the information.

Some of these options were very reasonable, like whether people thought that 66.7% should be the threshold or 50.1%. The asking of this question is not disruptive. The removal of discussion because you don't want discussion is disruptive. Another option discussed was the temporary appointment and then new election. Again, this is not disruptive. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:32, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

WOOF! New article

 * J. K. Ralston, western artist — Dog The Teddy Bear • Bully!  • 17:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Cool! *throws Dog a bone* Juliancolton (talk) 00:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Beatty
Please don't feel guilty. About four editors pitched in and made a lot of changes, which we hope are improvements. I think we've addressed all of your concerns. Please let me know if we've missed anything or need to do more. Finetooth (talk) 02:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Sorry I couldn't help out more, but I'll finish up the review this afternoon. Thanks for jumping in and addressing my concerns. Juliancolton (talk) 14:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Four Award

 * Wow, that was fast! Thanks! Juliancolton (talk) 14:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Julian Colton is a good man
Julian is a good man and a good moderator. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmcgowan89 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 11:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Soap
I added a co-nom to the RfA above. I hope you don't mind. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 17:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Did Soap even ask you to conom? If not, it's kind of disrespectful to just jump in like that... — Ed   (talk  •  majestic titan)  18:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with Ed, NSD. I know two other editors were considering adding their own nominations; I would have preferred you checked with me or Soap first. No harm done, I guess. Juliancolton (talk) 19:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually offered Soap a nom a couple of months ago. So I don't think there should be a huge problem with my co-nom. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 22:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * To be fair, Soap did turn down your nom offer NSD. Although personally I don't see a massive difference between a nom statement and a support rationale.. - Kingpin13 (talk) 22:26, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. And why assume, when you can ask? Looking at how Soap phrased his "no thanks" as it were last time, I think it would be wise to ask. -- Taelus  ( Talk ) 23:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ask Soap to comment, it's up to him. Keep in mind some people will oppose just because they don't like lots of conoms.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 23:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is his decision, but I feel some degree of personal attachment to my RfA nominations, and I feel unilaterally adding co-noms boils down to stealing the original nominator's thunder. Most people don't like to see any more than two or three co-noms, and since we now have an increasingly long waiting list, I'd rather see more substantial statements being added. NSD, again, I really appreciate your endorsement, and I'm not trying to be rude; I hope you understand where I'm coming from. Juliancolton (talk) 00:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and moved my co-nom to the support section. Hope this is better. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 00:36, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That's great, thank you. No hard feelings I hope? Juliancolton (talk) 00:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Nope, no hard feelings. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 11:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Good nom -- but re: "while my participation on Wikipedia is gradually winding down": I hope that's not true. -- Rrburke (talk) 21:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yeah, I've been getting kind of bored with WP lately, but I still have the occasional burst of activity. Juliancolton (talk) 23:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Issue Regarding Deleted Article
Hello, I'm writing because of deleted article Esenthel Engine, deletion discussion available here Articles for deletion/Esenthel Engine. The discussion made more than year ago however was about the previous version of the article, the two reasons for deletion of the article was advertising tone of the article and lack of secondary sources. Both reasons no longer applied to the improved secondary version of the article, it was online for long time, but just few days ago it got deleted and blocked without any specific reason at all. Thanks. Silverbyte (talk) 10:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. Have you tried contacting, who made the most recent deletion? Juliancolton (talk) 23:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, JC, it was my suggestion (at WP:REFUND) that Silverbyte came here, as you were the closer of the original AfD. BencherliteTalk 14:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Well, it looks like you (Silverbyte) have already received some helpful comments at the undeletion page, but let me know if there's anything I can help with. Juliancolton (talk) 15:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Grab some glory, and a barnstar
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 14:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

GAN Help
Hello, I would like to review good article nominees, but I need some help. Could you tech me this concept? If you can, I would mostly like to review Sport and recreation orFood and Drink. Thank You and Happy Editing! -- Nascar 1996  20:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'd be happy to help. Do you have any experience with the GA process? Have you read the GA criteria? Juliancolton (talk) 20:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have that much experience, but I have read the criteria. Also, you may need to know that I have created seven GAs, but I am also in school. -- Nascar  1996  20:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The school bit doesn't matter, not to me at least. Would you like a step-by-step tutorial, or simply somebody to tag along while you tackle a nomination? Juliancolton ( Nascar 1996 ''' 23:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)er talk:Juliancolton#top|talk]]) 21:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have read everything about GA and I believe that somebody to tag along during one would help me better. -- Nascar 1996  21:08, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, then. If you haven't already, go pick out a decent-looking article and I'll work with you from there. Cheers, Juliancolton (talk) 21:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Does it matter what subsection it is in? -- Nascar 1996  21:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, find something that interests you, ideally. Otherwise it can be hard to stay with an article long enough to assess its quality. Juliancolton (talk) 21:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I have chosen Park Grill. -- Nascar 1996  21:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Of all the choices! ;-) That one is somewhat controversial; you can review it if you want, but I'd recommend picking something more "dull". Juliancolton (talk) 21:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sometimes you have to run before you can walk. I would appriciate if you would help. Here is the link. -- Nascar 1996  21:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, OK, I guess. The first thing to do is take a somewhat-cursory look at the article, and see if there are any glaring issues. Do any such problems jump out at you? Juliancolton (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * First, I noticed that most of the reference are in the body of the article, but I beleive that the references also need to be added in the lead. Second, I noticed that there are no coordinates for the location. Third, under the History section, shouldn't there be a comma after parnerships, but before including? I am still working on it.-- Nascar 1996  21:57, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Does this make sense "In late 2001, Matthew A. O'Malley and James Horan proposed Park Grill and Park Cafe to "provide both white-tablecloth meals and picnic-hamper fare for visitors to Millennium Park"." or would it be "In late 2001, Matthew A. O'Malley and James Horan proposed Park Grill and Park Cafe to "provide both white-tablecloth meals and picnic-hamper fare for visitors in Millennium Park"? -- Nascar 1996  23:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I have finished reviewing it and the rest is on the Nomination page.-- Nascar 1996  01:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I am going to pass it because it looks as good as my most recent good articles.-- Nascar 1996  14:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I'm not very satisfied with your review. You don't address the issue that caused the article to fail multiple previous nominations: over-emphasis on unimportant information. Juliancolton (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Autoreviewer
Thanks, Julian, for the autoreviewer rights. Finetooth (talk) 05:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'd give you rollback too, but I don't know if you want all those extra buttons floating around. Juliancolton (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Previous delete of Hezekiah M. Washburn
Hi Juliancolton, is it possible to undelete an article which was deleted for notability (Hezekiah M. Washburn) and place the restored article in my userspace so I can refine the article to attempt to get it up to notability standards? Feel free to respond here as I automatically add pages to my watchlist. Thanks for your time, Dygituljunky (talk) 15:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ at User:Dygituljunky/Hezekiah M. Washburn. Regards Juliancolton (talk) 17:51, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your quick response on an old issue. --Dygituljunky (talk) 19:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Issue Regarding Deleted Article
Regarding, User_talk:Juliancolton/Archive_29

Hello, thank you for the reply, the UtherSRG user is currently unavailabe, some other user replied to me (User_talk:UtherSRG) that the article didn't contain enough external sources. I however disagree with that, there are plenty of other articles with similar or even less number of external sources, let me just name a few: ShiVa (game engine), Leadwerks Engine, Truevision3D, I can list much more.

Thanks. Silverbyte (talk) 17:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You might want to initiate a discussion regarding the article at this page by following the instructions there. Let me know if you need help in doing so. Regards, Juliancolton (talk) 00:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Question about confirmation decision
For my own edification, can you explain why you confirmed user:Joekoday, with only a single edit, presumably to ask to edit here, but no edits in subsequent month. Is this someone you know?-- SPhilbrick  T  20:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I generally grant the autoconfirmed right to anybody who asks. If they vandalize, they can be warned or barred from editing like any other user. Juliancolton (talk) 00:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the answer. I probably read too much into it. SPhilbrick  T  22:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

(grumble) G. Howes
Please take a look at this. Just wrote it and nom'd for DYK. Please copyedit, reorganize, etc as you see fit. — Rlevse • Talk  • 17:16, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds familiar... :) I'll take a look this evening. Juliancolton (talk) 19:34, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And the article even has local significance! Neat. Juliancolton (talk) 19:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice side benefit for you, hehe. Great reorg you did there.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:13, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, although 2-column reflists do look much better. ;-) Juliancolton (talk) 00:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No they don't! If they look so much better, why don't people put the body in two columns? Huh, huh, huh? — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Some sections would be nice as well. Overall, solid article. Airplaneman   ✈  04:08, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Saw this and thought why not try? Ucucha 20:39, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:BEANS at its finest. Though in all seriousness, with a bit of tinkering, that could be a good idea for the extremely long articles. Juliancolton (talk) 20:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ugh, you guys are great copyeditors, but you need to work on your "columnization" prefs ;-) Seriously, User:Ucucha/Columns, hurts my eyes to look at, honestly. We'll just have to agree to disagree on the column thing. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 22:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I hope you didn't think I was seriously proposing that. :-) Ucucha 06:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * But... Wikipedia is serious business... Juliancolton (talk) 11:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ucucha-actually I did think that. JC is correct on seriousness ;-) You guys are a riot. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Re:Virgil 92
Thanks. Leave Message, Yellow Evan home

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 20:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Userpagebarn

 * Thank you! Juliancolton (talk) 21:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Dramaout
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Great_Wikipedia_Dramaout/3rd#Participating_Wikipedians

and also a mention on WP:ANI. I would love to have you participate! Remember July 5th, the starting date! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Carmen
I'd be glad to. I'll get to it either this evening or tomorrow (Saturday). Finetooth (talk) 00:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thanks a ton. Juliancolton (talk) 00:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

The 3rd Great Wikipedia Dramaout
17:46, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Talkback again: I'm going to assume you're watching my talk page so I don't have to leave these messages each time. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:06, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Carmen
I found that before, but unfortunately I have no idea where the disaster declaration was issued - What do you mean? BTW no response on FB from the messages left Hink last night yetJason Rees (talk) 20:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * FEMA does not specify any details about the disaster declaration, such as the area affected by it. As a result, including it in the article would leave the reader hanging in my opinion. Juliancolton (talk) 00:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats a fair response.Jason Rees (talk) 01:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Carmen review
Hey there. I noticed that User:Atmoz commented on the "slowed to a drift" phrasing in the Carmen FAC. That now makes two people who have criticized the ambiguity of the phrasing. I didn't press the issue in my review because you said you would add forward speed statistics (which, as far as I can tell, hasn't happened). Perhaps instead of telling us why the phrasing is good, you should simply acknowledge the fact that it is ambiguous and work to improve it.

There are two things you should know about me: the first is that I try to avoid commenting on the behavior of other users. Instead, I focus on the content. The second is that I really really enjoy doing line-by-line prose reviews. I even enjoyed working on Quark, despite the subject matter being way over my head and having to work with 4 authors who rarely agreed with each other, let alone with me. However, when I was going through Hurricane Carmen, I found myself wanting to just give up. Your general attitude seems to be either "Well, I don't see that this suggestion improves the article, so I will argue against it." or "I'm convinced beyond all doubt that this will improve the article, so I will employ it." The attitude I've enjoyed working with in the past has been the exact opposite: Either "Well, I don't see that this suggestion hurts the article, so I'm going to employ it." or "I'm convinced beyond all doubt that this will hurt the article, so I will argue against it."

As I mentioned during the review, it is impossible for any human to accurately judge the readability of their own writing. As such, the second attitude is far more likely to result in an overall improvement than the first attitude. I strongly suggest you employ the second attitude for future reviews. I apologize if you feel like I'm lashing out unnecessarily or if you think this particular article did not provide me with an accurate characterization of your editing views. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 01:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Cryptic, I totally appreciate in-depth reviews of my articles, don't get me wrong. I find assessments from users unfamiliar with the topic at hand particularly valuable, and as you know, my ultimate goal is to provide readers with a solid foundation on which to begin their research. I'm sorry if you regret getting involved—I certainly hope that isn't the case—but in to be perfectly honest, I think your description of my FAC philosophies is more-or-less accurate. I consider myself knowledgeable in the field of meteorology, though by no means an expert, and I write articles to the best of my ability. When I nominate them for FAC, I seriously consider most or all good-faith suggestions and contemplate whether they truly improve the article. If I disagree, I'll say so, and I generally don't make any suggested edits unless I agree with them. This is obviously not a gesture of disrespect toward anybody, but rather a reflection on the open-editing principles of Wikipedia; even if I disagree with a particular suggestion, anybody else is welcome to carry it out themselves, at which point it becomes fair game. I intend to continue responding to my recognized content candidacies in this manner, although I hope we can resume constructive debate on other articles in the future—even if our beliefs differ so widely. With respect, Juliancolton (talk) 12:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * As a personal rule of thumb when reviewing other people's work, I try to discuss changes I'm unsure about before implementing, as it's much easier for the author to sift through a brief discussion than it would be for them to reread the entire article or check through the revision history to see what damage I've wrought. However, if you want me to be more proactive, then so be it! I'll go put my remaining suggestions into effect and add my support to the FAC, and if you feel the need to revert, I won't be offended. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 01:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

GA Mentor
Hello! I am currently reviwing the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, my second GAR. Currently I have some problems with the nominator who does not seem to believe in my comments. He/She seems to think they are to harsh and begs me to fail the article. Since I am not very experienced with this so I would gladly take advice from a GA mentor here so I know what/if I did something wrong and what I can improve. And perhaps most relevant now, what to do with this review.

Thank you in advance! Esuzu (talk • contribs) 12:52, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Esuzu. I haven't read the entire discussion, but at first glance, I tend to side with the nominator. I know from experience that vague criticisms of an article can be quite frustrating, and while his or her tone does seem a bit strong (at first glance, again), I think the debate would benefit from more specific points. Keep in mind that when an editor nominates an article for GA or FA, they probably feel their work is as good as it's going to get. And while it may be clear to us what needs fixing, it's much harder for them to pinpoint issues. Juliancolton (talk) 12:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your answer I will try to be more specific in the future. Unfortunately I had to resign as the reviewer since the nominator stopped assuming good faith etc. Esuzu (talk • contribs) 21:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 June 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 18:55, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer
Hi. Thanks for the new Reviewer userright. However, I am having trouble putting three topicons simultaneously on the top-right corner of my page as only the last one displays. Is there a way to do this, or would I have to use the image and associated link? Thanks. ~ AH1 (TCU) 21:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'm not sure. I don't think you really need one for reviewer, though. Juliancolton (talk) 21:30, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't be silly Julian, of course you do. What's the point in having a bauble if you can't show it off? Malleus Fatuorum 21:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Taken a shot at this for you, let me know if it's okay. - Kingpin13 (talk) 21:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the icons now, thanks. ~ AH1 (TCU) 22:23, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Latter Day Church of Jesus Christ
I have a quick question. You were the "deleting administrator" for Articles for deletion/Latter Day Church of Jesus Christ. Yes, I do agree that the article should have been deleted. However, the church appears on List of sects in the Latter Day Saint movement as it can be cited using a WP:V source as to existing. I was wondering if it would be appropriate to re-create the page only as a " #REDIRECT Latter Day Saint movement ". This would allow the church to appear in several categories that these sects are listed in. However, I'm still a bit green on WP and have never done this with a previously deleted page. Is this a No-No so to speak?--ARTEST4ECHO talk 18:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Artest. Yes, that would be perfectly acceptable, and indeed very helpful. Juliancolton (talk) 18:27, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Again, I have never done this on a prevously deleted page and didn't want to do it when I shouldn have in the first place..--ARTEST4ECHO talk 18:41, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Can u publish
Hi Julian Can you please move this to 1990-91 South Pacific Cyclone Season please, ThanksJason Rees (talk) 12:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Juliancolton (talk) 12:53, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ThanksJason Rees (talk) 12:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Greetings
Hi. This matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:1928_Okeechobee_hurricane#Requested_move has been re-listed with an amended proposal to a shorter title, and the period for comments is about to expire. You are welcome to comment if you wish, AT THE AMENDED SITE BELOW:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:1928_Okeechobee_hurricane#1928_San_Felipe-Okeechobee_hurricane

Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 00:35, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Commons username swap
This French speaker could use your help to sync his accounts: User talk:Xeno to move his commons:User:Sitron to "Citron" (it appears he autocreated a commons account that will block it). – xeno talk  13:23, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ I think? Juliancolton (talk) 13:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep - looks good. Thanks. – xeno talk  13:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Carmen
Congratulations on the promotion of Hurricane Carmen to FA. Finetooth (talk) 16:49, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! (And thanks for helping out with the PR and FAC as well.) Juliancolton (talk) 18:53, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 June 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 21:26, 29 June 2010 (UTC)