User talk:Nikkimaria/Archive 3

Re:For your information
I am just done replying at the FW; I am going to watchlist their talk pages now (it is a good idea!). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI - how the series developed :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:51, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

1/2 Prince
I noticed that you had made about 2 edits to the page 1/2 Prince on 2009-05-02. So, I was wondering if you would be willing to come and help some more. So far I am the only one who has made an effort to make a complete article for 1/2 Prince. I am in some desperate need of help but so far I have received none. I hope you'll come and help. The Sapphire Dragon (talk) 08:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I saw the edit you made! Thank you so much! Ever little bit helps!

The Sapphire Dragon (talk) 08:33, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The Lion and Sun
The Lion and Sun article is written by people who are not native speakers. The article is very inclusive and every line is sourced by reliable sources. It can be a possible nominate for Good Articles and FAs. However, it needs serious copy editing. I found your name in the list of volunteers for peer review. Could you please take a look at the article and fix grammer and make the language more natural English.--WIMYV? (talk) 03:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate for your work on The lion and sun article. --WIMYV? (talk) 22:55, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

GA review of ww2
I started the very long job of fixing the problems that you pointed out. Just wanted to let you know if you would like to comment.-- Coldplay   Expert  22:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Manitoba
Delighted to. Steve Smith (talk) 03:33, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you finished making significant changes for the time being? I've been holding off on a copyedit/prose review while paragraphs were being added and deleted.  Would now be a good time to do it? Steve Smith (talk) 00:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Gender aspects of globalization in China
"Do you know what's going on with this group?" Nothing good :/ As I am no longer an admin, I cannot fix it myself; and I am forced to wait for an admin to fix it. Few hours ago I've made a request at a talk page of an interested admin: User_talk:John_Carter. Earlier, I've emphasized to the students they need to work on one article, but I think they are rather confused by the userfication that happened (twice!) to their article. In the end, I can tell them only that many times to read WP:STUB. If you have any suggestions as to what I may clarify in my syllabi to avoid this in the future, do let me know. This is the first time I've had a group that was confused with this issue (out of ~20-something I've overseen over the years). Live and learn, I guess :> --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * They are already losing points for missing a series of deadlines, starting with the one that required them to have a proper stub in place. As I haven't had this happen before (in group projects), I think the problem lies with the particular group, not the syllabi (since 20+ other groups managed to create a stub and develop it collaboratively), but your suggestions and criticism are much appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

GAN
Hey just wanted to let you know that I addressed some more issues on the ww2 article that you may want to comment on/respond to. I still have a lot of problems to fix but some of them I cannot do on my own.-- Coldplay   Expert  19:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Droping you a line to say that several refranceing problems have been meet.-- Coldplay Expért Let's talk 18:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that all of the ref's have been fixed. Now its on to the images.-- Coldplay Expért Let's talk 21:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Greco-Persian War
The review is getting to a close. MinisterForBadTimes will iron out the points I commented. Do you have more suggestions concerning all GA issues. Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 13:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

My SUP is entering into the final phase
As the deadline of Nov 18 GAN is approaching, there should be a flurry of activity on the articles. I have posted various early comments and reviews on their pages; if you'd have some time too do something similar, I'd greatly appreciate it. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You are probably right with this, but can you explain on article's talk why? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop
As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome. For the Arbitration Committee, Risker (talk) 08:29, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello. Thank you very much for helping me out. I was between classes and didn't have time to go back and fix it, I am pretty new to wikipedia! So if there are any mistakes, its just inexperience. We are doing the article First World for a group project. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again! Kmm131 (talk) 12:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing the table! However, the part that had been combined into the table "Varying Definitions" is now gone, and I haven't been able to retrieve it by doing comparisons on the history page.  Can you please help me retrieve that section so I can repost it (assuming it was removed) Thanks, Rgg6 (talk) 23:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding the diff for me! I have added it back in. Rgg6 (talk) 05:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Autoreviewer
You're welcome! Acalamari 03:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Educational assignments now in GAN phase
FYI: Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Something to be on a lookout for when dealing with educational assignments (I do it as much as I can but more eyes...): potential copyvio/plagiarism problems (as seen here). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 02:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * PS. Proof that copyvio/plagiarism is not an isolated problems. Sigh. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * We are ready for more suggestions in Sociology of health and illness. Copyright problems are being addressed.--Dam59 (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Question for you:. PS. BI mispoke earlier - the assignment ends on 11th, not on 8th. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 16:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Talk:World War II/GA1
The nominator of the GAN has retired. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. There's been a couple of other editors working on that nom; I'll see if any/all of them are able to continue working without the nominator on board. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 21:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, seems like that isn't the case anymore. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No I seemed to have a mid-life crisis. (More like a young-life crisis) Anyway I came be to say that There are about 10-15 problems left and I have asked a question at the GAN. If you can answer that would be great. I need to finish this in the next few days or it will fail.-- Coldplay Expért Let's talk 01:14, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

St. Boniface General Hospital (Winnipeg)
I've had a good look through and left a few comments at the GA review. Hopefully we can bring this to a conclusion shortly now. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

The Impact of Globalization on Women in China
Hi could you regrade our article again. We fixed most of the things you've asked us to change. Thank you! Angelalhan (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 05:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

The Impact of Globalization on Women in China
Hi! Thank you for the quick response for regrading our article. I've made changes again according to what you've unmarked on the list. Can you check again to see if I correctly made the right changes? I also had a question on how to fix these two problems.

Maintain an encyclopedic tone at all times

The article is still in need of some general copy-editing, including grammar, punctuation, hyphens and dashes, redundancies, flow, clarity, and generally well-written prose

Thanks once again for your help! Angelalhan (talk) 17:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi again! So I tried fixing the article again. I read the article and took out works that seemed biased. Can you reevaluate our article again? Thanks so much! And if you find problems in our article can you let me know in which sections you see problems? I'm having a hard time looking for the areas that need lots of work. Thank you Angelalhan (talk) 16:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi I've made changes to make sure it was in an encyclopedic tone. Can you review our article again? Thank you Angelalhan (talk) 17:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nikkimaria I've made more changes to the article to fit the encyclopedic tone. Can you check if there is more progress? Thank you Angelalhan (talk) 13:47, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi I reread the article and gave more attention to the sections you've listed. Can you check our article once again. I've tried really hard in trying to correct these grammatical errors and trying to change the tone of the article. I really don't know what I'm doing wrong or how to fix it correctly. Thanks once again for your help Angelalhan (talk) 01:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I am working on the same article and it seems we are all trying to edit similar sections at the same time this evening. If you could make any further recommendations this evening or let us know if there are any other concerns of yours, that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much. Emm66 (talk) 02:35, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for helping in our article and giving us a good article review! Your help was very much appreciated! Angelalhan (talk) 05:36, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Final assessment of educational GARs
What are your thoughts on Sociology of health and illness? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Problems editing my page seem to be a byproduct of some of my love for templates and such. I may revise it - if I am still around in a little while :> Thanks for your help, and I do agree with your assessment - just wanted to hear a second opinion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Btw, could you do the GA maintenance for this? I am not sure what needs to be changed... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 12:29, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 16:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:23, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Help needed
Happy New Year,

I need a second opinion in the GA review on Philip the Arab and Christianity and would be glad if you could help. Several editors have dropped by, but none attempted a complete review. In my opinion the article is in no way fit for GA and I don't think the editor can make it a GA on his own, but he will submit the article quite often.

Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 09:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov
Saw you listed at Peer_review/volunteers and wanted to contact you about this article, which I have just listed at PR. If you have the time and are interested, Iwould greatly appreciate your feedback. Thanks! Jonyungk (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for the quick response, and look forward to your comments. Jonyungk (talk) 23:15, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Ireland
I see you have been involved in several GAs and wonder if you would have a look at Ireland. It has been quite some time since this became a GA but was delisted and much work has been done on it since them. An informal review and advise before nomination would be appreciated by Rannpháirtí anaithnid and myself because, because being the prime article of the Ireland WikiProject, this really should be an GA or even a FA. TIA ww2censor (talk) 05:30, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, there is no urgency, so have a great weekend. ww2censor (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

World War II GA question
May I ask which Notes are duplicates? Sorry for being such a dunce, but I'm having a hard time finding them. x.x" Cheers, Twilight   Helryx  03:11, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Philip the Arab and Christianity
I have attempted to address your major concerns, but find your comments lacking in precision and clarity. Without targets, examples, or objective formulations and methods, I cannot address your concerns in full. Regards, Geuiwogbil (Talk) 06:08, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarifications! I've responded to nearly all of your specific complaints, added links and brief explanations where the sense might be unclear, and cleaned up the section titles. There are still some points where I need further clarification. Regards, Geuiwogbil (Talk) 02:37, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Nikki, thanks for the review. Can you give me a sign when your issues have been solved? Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 08:56, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think I've got the remaining issues, except perhaps for the request for "cleaner and clearer writing". Has that been addressed through your examples of ambiguous or prejudicial wording? Geuiwogbil (Talk) 06:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:40, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Shoot out!!!
Your patience and extensive review of the World War II article deserves  some sort of recognition ....

Talkback
Trust me....im scared.-- Coldplay Expért Let's talk  00:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 08:59, 12 January 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 ForteTuba, 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) 01:18, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

O hai there...
Sorry to be a pain, but d'you think you could take a quick look at the citebook-ing I've been doing to WWII? It's taking a lot of time etc, and I have a horrible feeling I'm doing something wrong. And if I was, that would be bad, as there's a lot left to go. I don't want to break the article. Thanks, Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  16:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response and its un-slowness, Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  16:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, uh, sorry to bother you again. It's about that thing you told me involving periods and initals in citebook templates. If you take a look at this diff, it seems I've created a ref with "". Note the positioning of the period after "R". Have I messed up again? Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  18:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a relief. So should I just continue to do that with the intials? Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  18:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Aargh! Reftools! I have them enabled, and have had for a long time, but I forgot all about them! Thanks for reminding me, I'll proceed with the harassment posthaste. I don't really mind doing it that much, I just don't want to delay the GAR any further than it needs to be,  Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  15:54, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 15:06, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer review/Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov/archive1
Just sending a ping to see if were finished with this peer review of if you wished to comment further. Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 22:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Me again...
..., another thing. Sorry. I was tying up a couple of (well, one) loose ends at WWII, and I noticed all the accessdate parameters are inconsistent. Some are in the year-month-day format, some day/month/year, some month/day/year. A few variations. I changed some to the 2010-1-25 format, as that seemed to most common, but I thought maybe it should be consistent with the rest of the article's "normal" dates (which is apparently Month/Day/Year)? I'm willing to change/consistent-ificate that, if you want, though I'm not sure of the current consensus for accessdates, if there even is one. Reftools automatically provides an accessdate, but that seems to change periodically. I guess it's your call, Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  16:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

P.S. - I finished the citation formatting. Well, not really. Most of it. There were a few I couldn't do, but I'll bring up individual ones on the GAR later today/tomorrow. Sorry for taking up your time... Lord Spongefrog,  (I am Czar of all Russias!)  16:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. I think I'll stick with the "xxxx-xx-xx", Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  16:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Buzzz saying hi!
Hello there ..things are well i hope!!...Was wondering if you could take a look at another article i created Indigenous Amerindian genetics..again only if you have time ...Was hoping you could just take a quick look before i put it up for peer review. I am no expert in the field, however my wife is a geneticists and REALLY help me with the terms. Was hopeful it all makes sense to the average reader... What do you think? does it read alright??? ..was planing to let it sit for a bit ..then take a second look after some other Music stuff i have to do ( found i like to make portals)....Buzzzsherman (talk) 05:13, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Non-free images on WWII
Hi. I advise that this article is not considered for promotion for the time being- there is a still a wholly inappropriate non-free image in the article, along with what is approaching an edit war to try and keep it in.I am assuming you have seen my posts on the GA page. If you have any questions regarding this issue, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 12:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 21:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Grammar
Hi Nikkimaria

I came across your review of 'Nothing to my Name' on the Featured Article Candidates board. I had been happily wending my wikignomish way through typos and grammatical confusions and was therefore surprised to come across the 'no contractions in article text' rule. Where is this laid out for wikiusers that I missed it? And is it actually a problem? There is no comparable guideline in academic discourse, at least here in the UK: it's not something that has affected my doctoral thesis. Is it a genuine impediment to FA status?

Thanks, Gavin BlackMarlin (talk) 15:24, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, and for including the relevent links. I appreciate it. G BlackMarlin (talk) 18:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Caro 08
Your so right ..now that i look at other edits (older) he is tying ..I was a bit fast .. what i saw was blanking and saw previous warning all good ...Buzzzsherman (talk) 21:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * LOL poor guy!!

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

RE:Climate table help?
Ill take a look at it and see what i can do. Cheers  Kyle  1278  22:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Quick qustion do you want is more like the tables on the Alberta and Saskatchewan articles?  Kyle  1278  22:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I have finished and added it to the article if you need anything else feel free to ask.  Kyle  1278  23:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Manitoba
I've gone through the article as you asked. Couple of points. The MOS says to use "17th century" rather than "seventeenth century". I used the conversion template for temperatures as that ensures it complies with the MOS. Also % throughout as the MOS says either and I came across % before percent. I removed the C and the F conversions for the humidex as it's a number rather than an actual temperature and can't be converted. The rest was just links. Cheers. something lame from CBW 03:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry about taking out the section on the flood. I also deleted an image but at least I noticed that. I think it must have happened when my browser crashed. something lame from CBW 13:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Lynn Johnston
Sure did. The article looks much improved from when I last saw it, by the way - good luck at FAC, whenever you bring it there. Steve Smith (talk) 04:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 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) 13:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

List of tallest residential buildings in the world
I have nominated this article for Feature list, "LIST OF TALLEST RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN THE WORLD" i need your help regarding, gramatical mistakes,and copy editing my purpose is to make this article perfect or close to perfection, so that it would for sure become a feature list.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 12:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I have solved the issues pointed out by reviewers, and the only thing which remains is the "Prose", which i think that is pretty much better than before now, tell me how can i improve the alt text of the images, i have just written like this, [|alttext=Image of Chelsea Tower], so is it write or what more is required to be added ?

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 16:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi-periphery countries
Hey SilkTork. That article was submitted for GA Review as part of a university assignment that has since ended. The nominator has not edited since December. While it's possible that someone else will "take over" the nomination, you're probably going to end up failing it due to inactivity on your points. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 14:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. It is not uncommon for articles to be nominated by people who are unable or willing to do the work necessary to get the article listed as a GA, which is why I get in touch with significant contributors and related WikiProjects when putting a GA review on hold. The GA process encourages a collaborative approach to editing, and I fully support that. In cases where nobody is interested (or able) I have sometimes done the work myself. In this case I don't have the sufficient interest or knowledge to bring the article up to standard myself, so if nobody steps forward in the next seven days I will close it as a fail as you predict.  SilkTork  *YES! 14:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

World War II
It looks like you're the primary reviewer for this article's GA review. I notice that the "on hold" for it is 108 days old, which is over three months. I also see a lot of editing going on, and there have been over 500 edits since it was nominated. Since seems to indicate that the article fails the stability criterion of WP:WIAGA. Seems like the review should probably be wrapped up soon. WTF? (talk) 19:57, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The high number of edits is probably due to people trying to improve it to pass the GA; I've made over 100 edits to it since it was nominated for that reason (though I'm not the nominator). There were about sixty issues raised during the initial review. Remember, it is a huge article, and pretty important too, so will take longer to finish than most other GA's. The stability criterion states "it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute"; as far as I'm aware, there'r no going edit wars. But that's just my opinion what do you think...? Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  20:07, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, the review's been open forever, but I agreed to give them lots of extra time so long as they continued to work on the article. I tend to look at the stability issue the same way that WP:WIAFA does: "it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process" (my emphasis). The only real stability issue was the recent disagreement over the use of non-free images and the resulting RFC (which any watching GAN hopefuls/helpers should probably be trying to resolve hint, hint ). Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Nikki. I tackled the external links issue. I think you have the right approach to stability issues, and i think that particular image issue is probably not going to affect this article. Given that it is line ball whether the image will even be kept at Battle of Berlin, i think it highly likely it won't reappear in WWII. You have said on the review page "Notes that appear more than once should be named and appear using the proper multiple-ref formatting". I would not say this needed to be done for GA. You raise the lack of full citations in some cases. I got through about a third of the cites and didn't find any problem ones, other than a crappy weblink that i've deleted. Do you still think there are incomplete cites? Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 05:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I think I've fixed all of the incomplete cites. Probably, Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  13:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Ethnic origins in Canada
Thank you for fixing the confusion between ethnic origins and ethnic groups. It is astonishing how people can misread sources. Ninguém (talk) 02:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Punctuation
"Rvv - just as a hint, a "small punctuation mistake" doesn't require 100+ characters." Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. Saudi Arabia Loves you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.248.115.91 (talk) 13:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 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) 12:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Rollback
Hi Nikkimaria, per our recent discussion I have added the WP:ROLLBACK permission. I've reviewed your last 500 edits and see exemplary use of edit summaries and correct handling of vandalism. Please read through the link above to be sure you understand that rollback is used when you would have said nothing substantive in the edit summary anyway, other than "rvv" or "noted" in the case of your user talk (and when a mass rollback has been discussed elsewhere, but I don't think that's your field). Also, for me personally, when I see something like someone's name added to the bottom of an article or "Hi mom!" put in somewhere, it's technically vandalism and can be rollbacked, but I think of that as just someone seeing if it's really true that anyone can edit Wikipedia, so I undo it manually with "rv test edit". Anyway, enjoy your new thingy! You may have to log out and purge your cache to get it to show up, but it's there now. Regards! Franamax (talk) 22:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 22:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)