User talk:Noleander/Archive 10

Peer review limits changed
This is a notice to all users who currently have at least one open peer review at Peer review. Because of the large number of peer review requests and relatively low number of reviewers, the backlog of PRs has been at 20 or more almost continually for several months. The backlog is for PR requests which have gone at least four days without comments, and some of these have gone two weeks or longer waiting for a review.

While we have been able to eventually review all PRs that remain on the backlog, something had to change. As a result of the discussion here, the consensus was that all users are now limited to one (1) open peer review request.

If you already have more than one open PR, that is OK in this transition period, but you cannot open any more until all your active PR requests have been closed. If you would like someone to close a PR for you, please ask at Wikipedia talk:Peer review. If you want to help with the backlog, please review an article whoe PR request is listed at Peer review/backlog/items. Thanks, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * PS Do you want me to close the Foley Square trial PR - just saw the notice you put there? Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, please close it. --Noleander (talk) 01:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I will try to look at it - thanks for the heads up. I am a bit swamped at the moment, so it will take me several days at best, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MaryBethTinkerArmband.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:MaryBethTinkerArmband.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:37, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Image was mistakenly removed from ACLU; I restored it and added detail to the (existing) fair use rationale. --Noleander (talk) 18:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ulster Defence Regiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ulster Defence Regiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

George W. Romney FAC
Thanks very much for the kind words and comments you made on this. I have finished my changes and responses regarding your comments, see Featured article candidates/George W. Romney/archive2. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:56, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied at the FAC page. --Noleander (talk) 17:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Margaret Sanger article
"Although Sanger's views on race appear archaic from a modern viewpoint," I removed the above because it represents a violation of WP:NPOV. Describing a view on race as "archaic" is clearly a point of view. It doesn't matter if this is the language used in the citation or not. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:51, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, there has been some disruptive editing in that article recently. A lot of citations removed, and changing the Race and Eugenics sections to make her sound as bad as possible. I've reverted it. Keep an eye out for this. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:53, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Lowe's
It's apparently their position that you need to sign this two page form in order to post a link to their site: https://images.lowes.com/animate/HypertextLinkAgreement_A.pdf (Further details: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/02/a-license-to-link-lowes-has-one.ars)

henrik • talk  16:50, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I replied at Talk:Lowe's. --Noleander (talk) 17:53, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Foley Square trial, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mike Wallace and The Worker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 16:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hunnic Empire
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hunnic Empire. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 16:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 02:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Query from Babel41 about "Mark Satin" FAC
Hi Noleander. You gave my Mark Satin FAC two useful reviews (10 December and 7 January). and I responded diligently, I think, to the letter and spirit of your comments. The article is still in the FA hopper, seventh from bottom, and I suspect one reason it hasn't advanced yet is it has only three "Supports", albeit from three senior Wikipedia reviewers. (There are no "Opposes".) I am new at this, and I hope I'm not violating Wikipedia protocol here. But I wonder if you might be willing to look at my responses to your last review, and consider lending your support to the finished article. - Babel41 (talk) 23:42, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Commented at FAC. --Noleander (talk) 02:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. - Babel41 (talk) 20:25, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Luciano Laurana
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Luciano Laurana. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 18:27, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

ACLU
Feb 22. Got it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Romanians of Serbia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Romanians of Serbia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Santorum vs santorum
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Santorum vs santorum". Thank you. --The Gnome (talk) 07:58, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Foley Square trial (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Steve Nelson and Gil Green


 * American Civil Liberties Union (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Censor

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 16:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Non-fatal offences against the person in English law
Please note the corrections made at Talk:Non-fatal offences against the person in English law for future reference.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing that! --Noleander (talk) 16:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you have time for a FA review?
Hey Noleander, sorry I didn't reply sooner, I was out of town for the past week. Unfortunately, I'm not going to have time to do an FAC review any time soon. I'm currently working on a batch media import for the Walters Museum, organizing Wiki Loves Monuments USA, and helping to put together the Teahouse project on en.wiki (all in my spare time). Have you tried asking Awadewit? Good luck with the FAC! Kaldari (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, I'll try Awadewit. Good luck with your projects! --Noleander (talk) 22:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: W. E. B. Du Bois
This is a note to let the main editors of W. E. B. Du Bois know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on February 23, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/February 23, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or his delegate, or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:



W. E. B. Du Bois (1868–1963) was an American civil rights activist, author, and editor. After graduating from Harvard, where he was the first African American to earn a doctorate, he became a professor of history, sociology, and economics at Atlanta University. Du Bois, one of the co-founders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, rose to national prominence as the leader of the Niagara Movement, a group of African American activists who wanted equal rights for blacks. Racism was the main target of Du Bois's polemics, and he strongly protested against lynching, Jim Crow laws, and discrimination in education and employment. He was a proponent of Pan-Africanism and helped organize efforts to free African colonies from European powers. Du Bois wrote several seminal essays and treatises, and published many influential pieces in his role as editor of the NAACP's journal The Crisis. He was an ardent peace activist and advocated for nuclear disarmament. The United States' Civil Rights Act, embodying many of the reforms for which Du Bois had campaigned his entire life, was enacted one year after his death. (more...) UcuchaBot (talk) 23:03, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Great work on the Du Bois article. Congratulations on getting it to FA. Span (talk) 07:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your answer at the Footnote page. There are times when an answer may seem obvious (at least in terms of outside world editing) but when I still like to have someone who understands the system here actually say it. Now back to the article and the person who is trying to change List of Weatherman members. He is an interested party, you probably noticed (or at least is using the name of one of them.) SeoMac (talk) 20:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. I dont think the user name (Steen) should be considered to be the editors actual identity.  As for the list: it may be that M. Steen was a member of the WU, but a source needs to be provided before that name can be added to the list.  Cheers.  --Noleander (talk) 20:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Golding Bird FAC
I had already conceded your point on the shortcomings of the referencing system, it was really not necessary to keep banging on about it on the FAC page. You really don't know what I am, or am not able to do and that I "have all the sources at my fingertips". In fact, I am currently working long hours away from home in Germany and have little time for Wikipedia. I am editing on a tiny-screen notepad which is entirely unsuitable and all my books and documents are elsewhere. I would also say that your claim that it will never get done if I don't do it now requires a citation. If you were to politely ask me, I might put it on my Wikipedia to do list and do it sometime when I have less real life work. Items on that list average 18 months to 2 years to get to the top, but they invariably do get done eventually.  Spinning Spark  23:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Didn't mean to go into so much detail about WP:INTEGRITY ... I wasn't sure if you knew about the ramifications, but it sounds like you do.  It's a great article and I'm sure other reviewers will think so also!  --Noleander (talk) 01:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the praise. To be honest, I had never really noticed WP:INTEGRITY and WP:BUNDLE before but will probably follow this in the future.  I found the bundling style in other article(s) and thought it was a good idea so copied it.  Spinning  Spark  19:00, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Du Bois categories
Redundancy I made the philosophers category a subcategory of the writers category (any philosopher will also be a writer)--this serves to make the writer category redundant and help diffuse a large category. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:12, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Of course! I'm always happy to help--you've done a fine job on this article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Birth control
I am finished reviewing the FAC for birth control in the USA. I am quite enamored of the article; I appreciate its spare simplicity and straightforward style.

If you have enough extra time to look over my own FAC, please post your comments at Featured article candidates/Santa Maria de Ovila/archive1.

Cheers! Binksternet (talk) 05:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the thorough and thoughtful review.   I've posted comments at Featured article candidates/Santa Maria de Ovila/archive1. --Noleander (talk) 13:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Great work on the "Mark Satin" bio!

 * Thanks. You did a great job on the article! --Noleander (talk) 13:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

soviet wage reform fac
Hello! Thanks for your help and support at the FAC for Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962 last month. I thought I'd let you know that I'm having another go at getting that magic shiny star. The new FAC is at Featured article candidates/Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962/archive2 and I would really appreciate any comments. cya! Coolug (talk) 13:06, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied on their Talk page. --Noleander (talk) 14:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998
Sorry for not getting back to you - it was only when you failed the review I noticed you'd even started! I think you had the right idea with the talk page notice you kindly did for one of my other articles. Will relist soon/answer comments. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 21:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that! I  guess I forgot to mention it on your Talk page.   I wish the GA process were more automatic:  it seems that there are a lot of steps that have to be done manually.  Let me know when its relisted, and I'll start the review again.  Or, can the review be un-failed and just reanimated? --Noleander (talk) 21:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Um, well, I think there's generally quite a lot of discretion. But the answer to your query is really to have the article do a more thorough treatment, and that'll take a week or couple of weeks. I'll let you know, but feel free to leave it on the pile. I suggested automatically notifying nominators, but others thought that the personal element was more important. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 21:58, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 23:28, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Mutual reviews
Hi Nole, while I was posting a few links at WikiCup/Reviews, I saw that you're having an article up for reviews as well. How about I review Foley Square trial and you either review Russian submarine B-585 Saint Petersburg or Featured list candidates/List of Ohio class submarines/archive1, or both? I'm probably gonna review your GAN anyway, so it's your choice whether you want to review my articles or not. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 09:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, that sounds like it would be a fine idea. --Noleander (talk) 14:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ... also, I removed the Foley Square trial and Russian submarine B-585 Saint Petersburg articles from the Cup "needs review" list. --Noleander (talk) 15:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Regarding Featured list candidates/List of Ohio class submarines/archive1, I think I'll abstain, since it I'd probably lean towards merging with the Ohio class submarine article. --Noleander (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gopalanand Swami
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gopalanand Swami. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Resolved. --Noleander (talk) 22:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for Birth control movement in the United States

 * Nice work! Congratulations. Binksternet (talk) 20:03, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. --Noleander (talk) 20:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

W. E. B. Du Bois
Duly noted; it's been a while since I edited this article.

Talkback
I will get on with your GAN tomorrow. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 11:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Indigenous peoples
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Indigenous peoples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Review?
Hi Noleander, I don't think we've run into each other before, but I've seen you reviewing a lot of articles at WP:FAC lately and noticed that you do very thorough reviews. Would you be available/interested in reviewing Prosperity theology? The nomination is near the bottom of the pile at this point. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 21:03, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 21:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow--it's been promoted already. Thanks for the help! Mark Arsten (talk) 00:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 01:49, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Miloš Obilić
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Miloš Obilić. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 February newsletter
Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was, again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was, thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were, , and. February also saw the competition's first featured list: List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from. At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.

The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.

The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk &bull; email) and The ed17 (talk &bull; email) 00:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (2)
I've made a few changes: +15% to prose size, and formatted Human Rights Act 1998 a bit to show the division is a suitable one. Do you want to have another look, or should I put it through the GAN process for someone else? (If you do, I a new nomination is in order.) Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:23, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'd be happy to resume the GA. I'm pretty busy the next 2 days, but I'll be able to get to it soon.  No need for a new GAN. --Noleander (talk) 18:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've enlarged the image. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 22:00, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Texas Revolution
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Texas Revolution. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 18:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 17:55, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 16:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

re Birth control movement in the United States
Hi,

Maybe you could schedule Birth control movement in the United States for the Main page some time in March&mdash;March is Women's History Month. MathewTownsend (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Good idea ... I wasn't aware of Women's History Month.  Another idea is October, when the first permanent clinic opened (in NY).   I'm still learning the ropes of the TFAR process, so getting on the main page is a bit confusing.  Thanks for the suggestion! --Noleander (talk) 20:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know about the article of the day proposal. I note you proposed it for March 20th, does that date have any particular relation to the topic (aside from being in March -Women's History Month)?  If not, did you consider March 22nd?  That would make it the 40th anniversary of the deciding of Eisenstadt v. Baird (at least according to the Wikipedia article, one would want to confirm that).  The article would be particularly relevant to the date.  Skimming over the material on the proposals page suggests that being on a date relevant to topic (especially a decade multiple) might give an extra point (and "points mean prizes").  Just a thought.  Hope it works out.  Zodon (talk) 07:58, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ideas. I'm not a real expert in the main page scheduling process, but at the moment here is how it stands:  the article is nominated in the "nonspecific date" category, which means the main page managers could put it on the main page any time (or never).  The March 20 date was just a placeholder date (I originally suggested that date because both nonspecific date slots were filled).  But you're right, March 22 may have more significance than March 20th.  We can just let the main page managers decide. --Noleander (talk) 14:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Berlin
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Berlin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 03:37, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: birth control movement in the United States
This is a note to let the main editors of birth control movement in the United States know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 12, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/March 12, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or his delegate, or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:



The birth control movement in the United States was a social reform campaign from 1914 to the 1940s that increased the availability of contraception through education and legalization. The movement was started by Emma Goldman, Mary Dennett, and Margaret Sanger, who were concerned about the hardships that childbirth and self-induced abortions brought to low-income women. In 1916, Sanger opened the first birth control clinic in the US, but it was immediately shut down by police. A major turning point for the movement came during World War I, when many US servicemen were diagnosed with venereal diseases, leading to an anti-venereal disease campaign that treated contraception as a matter of public health. Sanger successfully opened a second birth control clinic in 1923. Legal victories in the 1930s continued to weaken anti-contraception laws and in 1937 the American Medical Association adopted contraception as a core component of medical school curriculums. In 1942, the Planned Parenthood organization was formed, creating a nationwide network of birth control clinics. (more...) UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:06, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Noleander (talk) 16:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I noticed this article states Margaret Sanger's mother passed at the age of 45, whereas the article Margaret Sanger it's 50. Perhaps you would have knowledge/source of the correct age. Driftwood87 (talk) 02:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification. I'll research the sources and fix it. --Noleander (talk) 02:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Fifty is the correct age. I've fixed the article. Thanks. --Noleander (talk) 02:34, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you. It was a lot of work, but I learned a great deal in the process. --Noleander (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I can empathize -- I've had similar past experiences. ... &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

GA reviews
My experience reviewing is just quick fails, but I'll take a shot at it - your article's in good shape, I've helped so many articles pass the GA review that my knowledge of what to seek is good enough, and I know how annoying it is to wait for a review and have it not finished... igordebraga ≠ 00:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied at other talk page. --Noleander (talk) 05:20, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Congrats to you too. (hope they don't feel my judgement was bad and put it on the GAR...)

igordebraga ≠ 17:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If you're available to take a look here (don't know how long it'll take for the FA delegates to close it, maybe some more consensus will help?), I'd be more than willing to hear comments. Thanks. igordebraga ≠ 13:23, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * See if all you requested was done. igordebraga ≠ 15:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

 * Thank you very much. --Noleander (talk) 16:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Bonsoir
J'ai répondu de mon mieux mais je parle une très mauvaise langue anglaise. Il me faut un traducteur internet afin de vous répondre. Toutes mes excuses sincères. Je ne veux pas de guerre ( j'ai connu les morts au Rwanda et en France ), ni de disputes. Je déteste les disputes et les guerres. Je préfère la paix et l'amitié. Je ne sais pas votre pays d'origine, J'aimerai vous connaitre en toute amitié, je vous envoie l'amour en chanson. Je crois que plusieurs comportements masculins vont fuir les femmes du Wikipedia ( qu'il soit d,expression anglaise ou francophone). De Graves Injustices ont été commise envers la famille de Genevieve Afriat. La Fondation n'a jamais dit mot. Des femmes ont été bannies du wikipédia. En 2013 il me restera que très peu de femmes sur Wikipédia que ce soit en langue française ou en langue anglaise. un vieux humain --Vieux supporteur de hockey féminin (talk) 23:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to engage in dialog. I understand that you think the foundation is treating  Genevieve Afriat unfairly, but as you say: it is best to avoid battles, and it is better to work together for a resolution.  The Feminism project Talk page is not the best place to discuss that.  I suggest that you take it up at the Village Pump:  Click here:  Village pump (policy)  and put a post there.  You will get better reception if you write fully in English, and if you avoid mentioning any editors by name: just speak of general principles.  Bon chance. --Noleander (talk) 00:12, 18 March 2012 (UTC)