User talk:Noble Story/Archive1

Introduction
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  V 6 0  干什么？ · VDemolitions 13:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Charles Swift eval --thanks!
Thanks for taking the time to look at the Charles Swift article. I can definitely use them in my next round of editing. I wanted to ask though, did you mean to delete your comments from the talk page? (diff) It looks unintentional, so I'll probably restore them (If it was on purpose, feel free to fix it back). Well, thanks again. R. Baley 06:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

No, it was an accident. Thanks for changing it back. Noble Story 06:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Assessment
Assessment is ultimately a subjective exercise, of course, which means that people won't always agree. I believe that there's a trade-off between a player's importance and how substantial an article they merit. If a player has only appeared in a handful of first-class games, there is little that can be said about him. Thus I reckon that the article about Clayton Robson covers his career very adequately for a player who only made 6 first-class appearances. It has an infobox, which I regard as desirable. What more could one say about him? My rating of Geoffrey Udal is more marginal, but for a player who played only one f-c match I reckon that it just about merits Start. To leave it as Stub would encourage people to look on it as an article needing expansion, which would be misleading. Obviously for a major player it would be totally inadequate at five times the length. If you are still unhappy, I suggest raising the issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Assessment. JH (talk page) 16:56, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yi Jianlian
Hi, I've kept it at Start-class. Since you asked for some pointers on how to further improve, here are some: I hope this helps. Er rab ee 14:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Try to focus on Yi himself. The length of his parents is not relevant imho.
 * What is the added value of Yi attending film premieres? As it is now, I'd remove these sentences as irrelevant.
 * Try to avoid paragraphs consisting of only 1 or 2 lines. Expand them or merge them, but they now give me the idea that much more can be told; to me the article still looks like it's being built.
 * For every statement attributed to people, a reference is needed. The last sentences of Age Discrepancy, in which Battier and Yi are quoted, are not referenced.

Hi Noble, thought I would add a couple of suggestions. . . Hope this is helpful. R. Baley 18:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) make the intro one paragraph, (e.g.) "Standing at 7' Jianlian has been playing in the CBA for the (team name) since the 2003 season when he won the league's Rookie of the Year." and then something about his NBA prospects.  I would leave out his weight for this part and put it down in the article somewhere else unless it could read smoothly.
 * 2) rename pre-NBA career career to something else, especially as he doesn't have one yet. I want to suggest something but haven't thought of anything yet, maybe look at pages of other pro basketball players (like Shaquille O'Neal) of similar builds.
 * 3) matter of taste but, I like to link the first time an acronym appears in an article (even if it's already linked in the intro, to make it easier to figure out what it is). So I would link CBA to Chinese Basketball Association for people who are totally unfamiliar with the subject.
 * 4) combine info in pre-NBA career section to only three paragraphs.
 * 5) In the 2nd NBA draft para, lead with the flight to the NBA draft camps and date it, then follow with info on his agent.
 * 6) probably would lose trivia about movie premiers.

I noticed that you'd made a few changes
in the Beaumont Tower article including changing the "i" in iota to "I". Probably it should be the Greek letter iota (if there is a Greek letter iota) but I am including a scam of the book publishing information so that you can at least make an informed decision. Carptrash 02:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't see the picture too clearly, so I can't see whether the "i" is lowercase or not. But if you wish to change it back, then please do so. As it was, I only intended to change the typo "Michgan" to the proper spelling Michigan. I only changed iota to Iota as an afterthought. Noble Story 06:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

If you click on the image you'll note thta the "i" is the same size as the neighboring "o". Anyway, thanks for correcting the spelling of Michigan - that did need to happen. The other, I don't really care. Carptrash 12:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive
 WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive! WikiProject Biography is holding a three month long assessment drive! The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unassessed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2007 – September 1, 2007.

Awards to be won range from delicacies such as the WikiCookie to the great Golden Wiki Award. There are over 110,000 articles to assess so please visit the drive's page and help out!

This drive was conceived of and organized by Psychless with the help of Ozgod. Regards, Psych less Type words! .

Scott Dobie
Hi, I have to disagree with your rating of the article Scott Dobie as Stub class. Are you happy for me to amend this to Start class? If not please could you explain your reasoning and what you would require to move it on from Stub? Thanks. --Jameboy 22:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I've now re-assessed it as Start class. Thanks. --Jameboy 14:27, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Newsletter 5
To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot 15:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC).

SummerSlam (1994)
Hi, I noticed that you took this article off of this list of unreviewed articles. On the article's talk page, calbear gave some suggestions for improvement but stated that he was not committing to a formal review. Because the article still has no reviewer, I have added it back to the list. Thank you for your suggestions on this article; I have fixed both of them. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 16:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

McCall GA review
Hi. I'm currently working through your comments at the GA review. I'll add my responses in bold to the changes I make. Peanut4 (talk) 03:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. Once you get through all of my review and make some changes, I'll take another look at it and re-assess it. Noble Story (talk) 03:13, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I've done most of them. And where I've made no changes, I've added a reason why. Thanks for the review. Peanut4 (talk) 03:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll be taking another pass at the article and posting my review Part 2 soon. Thanks for your work correcting, by the way, I think it's improved a lot so far. Noble Story (talk) 04:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again. I've addressed the majority of the points or added some response to your review. The only (and not unsubstantial) job I have left is to add some references to a couple of sections. I have less reference sources available for those so it may take a few days to finish it. Thanks again for your review. Peanut4 (talk) 23:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Just seen your latest comments. I won't be around until Friday so will get back to fixing them then. Peanut4 (talk) 10:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Think we might be there. You want to take another look. And thanks for reviewing my History article too - on two counts. Peanut4 (talk) 21:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. If you look over (probably) my last review in my sandbox, and make the few corrections left, then I'll be ready to pass my final judgement. Noble Story (talk) 00:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah. I'd addressed your last review. I've added one other comment regarding the Valley Parade bit. Peanut4 (talk) 00:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

There is one more thing: "It was Bradford's home form—they earned 26 of their 36 points at Valley Parade...City were relegated with just 26 points." The contradiction should be addressed


 * I've addressed it. It refers to two different seasons, just that 26 is a coincidence. It should be clear now. Peanut4 (talk) 00:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your very concise and incisive review. You've helped bring the article on a million miles. Peanut4 (talk) 01:08, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It was my pleasure. Now on to "History of Bradford City A.F.C."... Noble Story (talk) 01:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Disagreement
Hi Noble Story. Please read the talk page on Bouncer (doorman) regarding your assessment. This note placed only because you may not watchlist the page. Cheers. Ingolfson (talk) 08:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hats off to you. I think we all know how one can get a bit hasty when there's so much to be done on Wikipedia. Cheers. Ingolfson (talk) 07:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Barry Bonds
You removed Bonds for having been failed previouly. It has been revised significantly since failing.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 01:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The nomination date was in February, so I thought that the review on March 17 had been the review. However, my apologies for the oversight, please re-nominate if you feel it needs to be. Noble Story (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Scandinavian historical articles
Hi. In the past, I have wikified quite a few of the above (the latest batch of which I note you claim need references at WikiProject Biography/Assessment). I think you'll find they are referenced adequately, but mostly limited to Scandinavian book biographies or websites (given that they are usually set in folklore in the distant past).

The fact that they are not English language sources does not discount them from English Wikipedia. What is of concern to me regarding assessment is that User:Aciram admits he/she does not have the confidence to formulate them properly to Wikipedia standard (sections, grammar, spelling, infoboxes, general wikification, etc.), so, as I say, I have transformed quite a few in the past.

Believe me, if I believed that they were pure fairy stories, I would have sent the lot to AfD by now, but the editor manages to include a ring of truth in all he writes, and is a good faith editor, not a fiction novellist. When I am able to send the reference webpages through a translation program, they do verify most of what is written.

If you feel able to better reference them, or help in any other way, please feel free. I personally have let Aciram know that I do not have time to improve them for English Wikipedia at the moment. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 18:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * When I said the articles needed references, I should have said "inline citations". I saw they had references, but I mean actually using references in the article.Noble Story (talk) 09:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Point taken. However, inline citations are the caviar, basic references are the bread. Given the language differences and the editor's lack of confidence, I think it unlikely that these type of articles are going to end up satisfying the purists among us. All we can do is tag 'em to the hilt. Thanks for your input. Ref (chew) (do) 21:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Bradford City History
Hi, thanks very much for the review. I think it is broad in its coverage. However, I do have another book, I'm going to take a read through to find if there is anything I've missed, so if you want to keep it on hold for a day or two more, it makes no difference to me to wait on a little bit. My overall aim with this article is to go for featured status anyway, so I'll have to ensure it's in perfect state for that anyway.

On an aside note, your two reviews have been superb. I'm also working on the article Valley Parade and my aim is to go straight to FAC rather than through GAN. It's pretty much finished as it is, and wondered if you would give a quick review of the text, to see what needs changing. Don't feel any pressure to do. If you do get time, then feel free to leave any comments on my talk page. Thanks so much for your excellent work. Peanut4 (talk) 22:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll just keep the article on hold for a little longer. As for Valley Parade, I'll look it over sometime soon, time permitting. On on aside, if you get all these articles to GA or FA status, and maybe a few more, maybe you should consider submitting "Bradford City" for a featured topic. Just a thought. Noble Story (talk)


 * That's fine. My long term goal is to go for featured topic, but I mean long term goal!! A couple of other football clubs have already taken a lead on this. Peanut4 (talk) 13:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Right back again. I've expanded a couple of bits for the middle sections and made some minor changes. So you might want to take another look when you get chance. Peanut4 (talk) 23:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for the review. Do you have any suggestions as to improvements, or how far off FAC it is? Peanut4 (talk) 22:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Ion Croitoru review
Thank you again for taking the time to review this article. I have responded to your comments. Please let me know of anything else that you feel needs to be fixed. GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I responded to your comment about the choppy sentences in the section about Bedlam in ICW and rephrased the text in the article. I believe that I have addressed all of your concerns. Please let me know if there is anything else outstanding. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I see that you are a good GAN reviewer. Do you think you can review WrestleMania X? iMat thew   20  08  19:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, I'll take it on if I have an opportunity. Right now I have five articles that I am reviewing/placed on hold. Noble Story (talk) 09:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Francis Bok
Thanks for the review of Francis Bok I believe that I have addressed your concerns. See the sandbox for my comments. Thanks again and I am waiting further feedback. Dincher (talk) 18:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Done again. Dincher (talk) 17:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Finished once again. Have a good one. Dincher (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and the promotion. Dincher (talk) 16:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer Reviews in your sandbox
I think all peer reviews should be done in the article talk pages and not in sandboxes. When the GA review is done, the sandbox is cleared and used for the next review(s), so that someone looking for the GA review details would have to dig through the sandbox history. This defeats the purpose of having the GA review on the article talk page. Such reviews are helpful for future editors and for things like FAC. Please see and comment at Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations. I appreciate your review work and all the care and time you take with it, but the use of sandboxes seems to me to be problematic at best. Thanks, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to say that your review work is excellent - keep it up (just fix that formatting! :) Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Portland Trail Blazers
Since I spent 3 days with no internet at home, I couldn't do anything at the Portland Trail Blazers article - but I recently did a huge edit trying to adress your requests, see what else is needed in the article (you probably won't pass it, but maybe I'll put it at GA/R after hearing your thoughts). igordebraga ≠ 02:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I've just failed it, as you can see. The big problems are the lists, although I can see you've made progress. But, as I mentioned before, you should eliminate at least one roster, as having both is redundant. Also, the "Players honors" still needs to be pared down. Hope that helps for the future. If you take it to GAN again, I'll be happy to pick it up and review it again. Noble Story (talk) 03:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 21:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Wazir GAR
I have addressed all of the points you brought up on the talk page. --Al Ameer son (talk) 03:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I have made the corrections. Sorry for not notifying you on the talk page. For the Mossad I added a description but I'm not sure its best, you tell me. --Al Ameer son (talk) 23:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the helpful review! I'm glad it passed. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Marshall Field and Company Building GA on hold
I think I have addressed your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your detailed comments. I hope I have now addressed them.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 08:20, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Are we there yet?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Zentatsu Richard Baker GA Review
I believe I have addressed all of your concerns for Talk:Zentatsu Richard Baker, except for this:

"The whole second, third, and fourth paragraphs in the Biography section need extensive referencing."

Because these paragraphs are fully referenced, perhaps you will understand my confusion. What do you mean by this? (Mind meal (talk) 18:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC))

Valley Parade copy-edit
Hi there again, I'm about ready to go to FAC with Valley Parade. It's under peer review, but nigh on everything has been addressed - I've just one tiny little thing, which I can't find a source for, so may not appear anyway. I know I asked if you got chance, whether you could go through the article just to read through the text. If you do get chance, I'd fully appreciate it, because as expected, one reviewer suggested it be given a copy-edit. Peanut4 (talk) 01:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * My apologies for not addressing it sooner. I'll be on it shortly. Noble Story (talk) 01:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No need to apologise. Your help has been greatly appreciated. Anyway, I didn't expect to be ready so soon with it to be honest!! Peanut4 (talk) 01:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Oil shale industry
Hi, Noble Story. Thank you for reviewing the Oil shale industry. I hope I fixed all problems you mentioned. Please let me knew if there is something else which needs to be fixed for the GA status.Beagel (talk) 16:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

You're a star
Thanks for your excellent reviews and your help on Valley Parade. It's been extremely appreciated. Peanut4 (talk) 20:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

First Great Western
Thank you very much for reviewing the article, if it is not too much trouble could you possibly have another look based on the changes I have made following your suggestions as it would save another month on the waiting list. --FGWQPR (talk) 20:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm. OK, just re-nominate the article, and I'll pick it up again to review. Noble Story (talk) 02:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FGWQPR (talk • contribs) 08:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Herbert Armitage James
Thanks for the reminder - I was committing the cardinal sin of editing whilst on holiday, wasn't I?! I'll get to it now. Regards, BencherliteTalk 20:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Let me know if there's anything else. BencherliteTalk 23:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Regards, BencherliteTalk 02:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sanja Matsuri Review
Hey, I just wanted to shoot over a quick thanks for the review of my Sanja Matsuri article. You made some great points and will attempt to fix many of them as soon as possible. Thanks again! Torsodog (talk) 02:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I see that you are an active GAN reviewer. Is there any change that I can get you to give Cyber Sunday (2007) a pre-GA review? iMat thew   20  08  22:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Roanoke Regional Airport
Thank you for the detailed set of comments. I do appreciate it as this is the first article I have worked on by myself to bring up to GA status. I have addressed your comments, and look forward to your reassessment. Thanks! Patriarca12 (talk) 23:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I have made the appropriate changes, and again, thank you for the detailed set of comments. Please advise how to proceed if this is still not quite to GA status. Patriarca12 (talk) 03:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for your detailed comments and time in helping the ROA article become GA. Please let me know if anything else needs to be cleaned-up. Patriarca12 (talk) 11:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 08:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Ed Turner (basketball)
Please see WP:ATHLETE. Athlete must have played in at least one professional league game. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:11, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Joe Rice
Thanks so much for your GA review and helpful comments on Joe Rice; it's made it a better article. I know that reviewing is time-consuming and often thankless, and I appreciate all your efforts. -- 16:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Your GA review on Dravidian parties
Hi Noble Story,

Thanks for your comments on improving the aricle. I really do appreciate the time you have taken to give such extensive commentry, rather than just refusing GA. I have to be honest that I didn't actually know about peer review thing and my GA nomination too was after another user suggested me to do so. I have done the changes that you have recommended. Hope it meets the GA standards now. Cheers Wiki San Roze†αLҝ 16:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello Noble Story. This article has been on hold for over a month now. As a courtesy to the editor who has worked on this, please decide if compliance with the good article criteria has now been met. Thank you. Gosgood (talk) 15:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing) GAN review question
Hi, thanks for your GAN review of the article to Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing).

You said: "The obvious thing about this article is that it is way too short. You mention the code, but you never say exactly what the code says."

The previous version of the article contained the core of the code, but it was removed as a result of the previous review.

The previous GAN Reviewer said: "Text dumps are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Please summarize the Code, rather than putting the whole thing in the article. Provide a link to the full text, perhaps in the external links section."

Now the problem is that the core of the code by itself is only four short paragraphs that hard to impossible to shorten. Since making them shorter was not a feasible option, did I go with the removal of the code and adding a reference to the full text of it instead. You can find it here

You said: ''"Plus, you don't really say what the effects of the code were, and why is was really notable.". ''

The notability is given by the fact that this is the first self-regulating guide and restriction that the industry imposed on itself, without federal or state lawmakers being part of it. I did not add this statement to the article, because the only proof of this is the fact that you can search as long as you want to and not find one that is older. I had the same debate about a similar case for another article. We have to wait until a reliable source mentions this fact one day. Maybe when there is a second time of something happening like this (yeah, the code was the first and only time so far that the industry imposed restriction on itself on a somewhat industry wide level).

Describing the effects of the code is possible, but finding references to back them up is not. Several companies that were in violation with the code changed the way how they conduct business to be compliant, but everybody was trying to keep things as quiet as possible. Being not compliant in the first place was nothing to be proud of and drawing attention to the fact that you were not via a public statement or published story about it was avoided whereever possible. Considering the size and importance of the affiliate marketing industry at that time, it was hard to get any main stream media coverage for almost anything related to the industry, thus avoiding coverage was very easy. There are some blogs of industry acknowledged experts and activists who reported on those things, but they do not make a good reliable source by Wikipedia standards.

Its tough with articles that are about a subject that is not niche anymore and at the brink of becoming part of the mainstream, but isn't just yet. Too large for the one thing and too small for the other. :)

If you have any tip, idea or advice how to solve my dilemma, I would appreciate it. Thank you very much. Cheers! --roy&lt;sac&gt; Talk! .oOo. 22:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the supporting comments at my user talk page. I left you a message there as well and something else :) Cheers! --roy&lt;sac&gt; Talk! .oOo. 04:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Editing trouble
I asked Coz 11 not to engage in accussing other editors of bias on talk pages. I asked him not to refer to David Stern has a liar or a man with no credibility (as he did on a talk page). Now, over at the Clayton Bennett article he has referred to Bennett as a "liar" on the talk page. Am I overreacting, or has this guy crossed the line? It's gotten to the point where almost every single day his biased edits have to be reverted or he has to be warned not to violate policies regarding personal attacks, conflicts of interest, assuming good faith, proper use of edit summaries, reverting pages, etc. I asked earlier if people thought something should be done about him, and the consensus seemed to be that I overreacted and he should be worked with. It seems to me that continually calling people liars is just going too far. I don't know what should be done about it though. Chicken Wing (talk) 08:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, I think he has been disruptive to say the least, although I can't say he has broken any hard-and-fast rule. I will consider going to a higher source now that warning him hasn't produced any change. According to WP:DISPUTE, the next step would be Wikiquette alerts. I sure hope it doesn't go beyond there. Noble Story (talk) 08:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking that up. I hope it doesn't go beyond that either.  He doesn't need to be blocked or anything like that.  But, I do think he needs a serious warning from an administrator.  Comments from regular users don't seem to be getting through.  Chicken Wing (talk) 08:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I opened up a discussion here. Hopefully, this will be enough to get things back under control.  I thought maybe I was overreacting to him calling Stern and Bennett liars repeatedly, but then I thought to myself that if I went over to a talk page for George W. Bush or Michael Moore and repeatedly called them liars, I'd probably be blocked by now.  Chicken Wing (talk) 09:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've also added to your comments, citing specific differences and examples. Hopefully, this will get things moving in the right direction from now on. Noble Story (talk) 09:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Dravidian parties
Hey! Sorry, but just wondering if you forgot about the GA nom on the above article that you left on hold. :D Cheers Wiki San Roze</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 22:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be bugging you again and again. :D Can you please look into the GA review. We are planning to further work on the article to get it to FA class if we pass the GA now. Your feed back and suggestions will be very much appreciated. Cheers <b style="color:orange;">Wiki San Roze</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 19:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I was getting rather busy the past few days. I'll look into it today. Noble Story (talk) 02:13, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks :D <b style="color:orange;">Wiki San Roze</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 09:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

positive reinforcement
What you think of the idea on User:Globalecon/Global_Economics? I'm just hoping I don't need to resort to ;) -- B figura  (talk) 04:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I do think checking the good articles is a good idea. Hopefully, the students will learn from it, and get progressively better. After all, that's what Wikipedia is about. Noble Story (talk) 08:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter
The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Congratulations, and great work reviewing this month! dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 00:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the award, even though I really tailed off the last two weeks... Noble Story (talk) 11:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

RE:Featured list candidates/Green Bay Packers Hall of Fame
I just wanted to let you know that I have addressed your concerns on the above discussion. Any more comments or suggestions are welcome. I am about to go to bed, so I will will address any farther concerns you may have tomorrow. Thanks again for the review. <font face="Harlow Solid Italic"><font size="2px" color="teal"> « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @  '' 09:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I have replied :) <font face="Harlow Solid Italic"><font size="2px" color="teal"> « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @  '' 19:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Direct references added. <font face="Harlow Solid Italic"><font size="2px" color="teal"> « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @  '' 01:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I was wondering if you had anymore concerns, like I said I have added the direct references like you suggested. Thanks again for the review. <font face="Harlow Solid Italic"><font size="2px" color="teal"> « Gonzo fan2007  (talk ♦ contribs) @  '' 09:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Not to pester you, but I was still wondering if there were anymore concerns? Your comments would be very welcome. <font face="Harlow Solid Italic"><font size="2px" color="teal"> « Gonzo fan2007  (talk ♦ contribs) @  '' 07:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: NBA Newsletter
I think he may be inactive for some period, sort of like a Wikibreak. Go ahead and start, seeing as it is May. We may need more than one this month, due to the playoffs. <font color="#FF8C00" face="Elephant">Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 03:06, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Only project members. <font color="#FF8C00" face="Elephant">Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 21:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I apologize for the late reply - I've been busy with school exams. You've done a great job with the newsletter. I'd love to help with the next edition.  -- Shruti14 t c s 03:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, go ahead. Just as long as you get in by June 1. Noble Story (talk) 08:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

2008-09 season
Please create the pages a little bit more accurately. Take 2008-09 Charlotte Bobcats season or 2008-09 Boston Celtics season as examples. Also, after creating an article, please update the seasons template of the respective team. ● <font face="broadway" size="3"><font color="#d8bb6c">8 ~ <font color="#008040">Hype  @ 11:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: NBA newsletter
Sure, I can deliver the newsletters with my bot. Just let me know when they're ready. Thanks! - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 12:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Bird-Johnson
I think the section is okay; moreover there was a ref name deleted, leading to invalid cite tags. It is commentary that is attributable, and there is some value (and indeed validity) in such commentary. It is a biography after all. Chensiyuan (talk) 05:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've restored the section partially, and tried to eliminate some of the more obvious pov statements. I've also tried to tie in the context in a better way. Chensiyuan (talk) 06:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Great to see an image at last, even if it's post-NBA. And looks like the collaboration you initiated is bearing fruit. =) Chensiyuan (talk) 02:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I'm pleasantly surprised how everyone has pitched in. I hope we can take it to FAC soon. Noble Story (talk) 10:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

GA on hold removal
I am a bit puzzled as to why you removed your GA on holds. I wrote Maria de Lujan Telpuk. Can you drop a note to my talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello Noble Story. Forgive my repetition, but this article too has been on hold for a month. As a courtesy to TonyTheTiger, please decide if this article now complies with the good article criteria. Thanks again. Gosgood (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

BJU
I can't figure out why you've created a new section called "footnotes" when there's already a "references" section. Some of the references also have newly created problems.--John Foxe (talk) 00:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that footnotes should be for actual notes (explanations, clarifications, etc.), and references for for the actual references (links, news citations and so on). Although I guess I can change it back if it's really that bad. Noble Story (talk) 09:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it's strange to have two categories, especially because references and explanatory footnotes so often logically go together. I'm going to eliminate the "reference" section, which will again at least give us one category. But check the notes individually, and you'll find technical problems that you've inadvertently created.  I don't have the technical knowledge to know how to fix them without simply reverting.--John Foxe (talk) 10:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I've now either eliminated or corrected all the problem citations. You should probably check them as well when you have a chance.--John Foxe (talk) 17:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)