User talk:Peanut4/Archive 3

Sunderland Echo
I've swapped the pic around - any better?-- Seahamlass  20:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've tinkered again... This is really, really strange. At peer review etc, there hasn't been any problems. This format was taken directly from an FA-status feature, and it worked fine for me until now. (Actually, it is still working fine for me on this computer...)-- Seahamlass  20:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Phew! Sorry about that! Glad we got there in the end.-- Seahamlass  20:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Just a quick question - is it still OK? I tinkered again with that section today, and just wanted to check. Also, is there anything more I can do to earn your support?-- Seahamlass  14:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

GA review
Many thanks for your review. I'll give the lead another look and maybe go for peer review. Can't go to FAC yet, nuthatch already there, might be my first ever FA fail! The Australian images of the tern are brilliant, much better than my SA one, but that was the only one of that ssp. thanks again jimfbleak (talk) 05:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Alan Dale
I've made the final change you suggested, any other concerns about the article? Gran2 15:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Jurassic Park III/GA1
I responded and am letting you know because I wasn't sure whether you were watching the page or not. Gary King ( talk ) 01:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

GA Thanks
Thanks for your efforts --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Money (The Office)
I think your comments have been addressed, and the article is ready. Red Thunder  14:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Maggie Gyllenhaal
I think I got the concerns left at the GA review. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:FOOTY discussion
Hi Peanut, not to sound annoying or anything, but I've recently started a discussion regarding the names of Brazilian clubs on wikipedia (here) and considering the scale and importance of the clubs involved and the fact that there is no formal move request, I thought it might be a good idea to inform some of the regular WP:FOOTY contributors in order to get a consensus and not just a few opinions. So if you could take a second to express your opinion, it would be appreciated, cheers. Ban Ray  22:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:Bradford City GA review
Regarding this I don't think I'm you're man for this one. I've nominated FACs before which I thought were cast iron and which ended up with 100% oppose. The only suggestion I'd make is ensure that every single reference is accurate.

Generally when I've seen FA revs they tend to check every single reference whereas in GA it tends to be a random sampling to check there's none that obviously don't work. Otherwise good luck. BigHairRef | Talk 00:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Luc Bourdon
I think we're ready for another look at the article.-Wafulz (talk) 15:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:Scottish expatriate footballers
I've deleted some players from the 'Scottish expatriate footballers' section because they've been put in there just because they have played outside Scotland. It's a page for Scottish footballers who have played outside Britian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.53.36 (talk) 18:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Songs for the Deaf GA fail
It's been a few days or so since Songs for the Deaf was failed and that was for three reasons.
 * 1) Breadth of coverage - you mentioned editors had voiced concerns and that the article seems fairly short. It's somewhat hard to understand what is meant. Compared to a huge amount of GA album articles, Songs for the Deaf is relatively average. Granted it is a famous album, but has surprisingly little online regarding the recording and such. From merely viewing other articles, it seems the coverage should have made it an easy pass (See Over the Rainbow (Connie Talbot album) and Mate. Feed. Kill. Repeat., promoted to GA in the same week SftD was failed).
 * 2) Stability - a lot of changes were made, granted, but surely this is a good thing? And changes are planned, but a lot of those changes relied on it being promoted to GA in order for an FA push.
 * 3) Images - not a clincher for GA, but if you felt it need more images, you could have asked for it among the many minor edits you requested.
 * 1) Images - not a clincher for GA, but if you felt it need more images, you could have asked for it among the many minor edits you requested.
 * 1) Images - not a clincher for GA, but if you felt it need more images, you could have asked for it among the many minor edits you requested.

This isn't meant to be seen as a critique of your reviewing methods or a plead for Songs for the Deaf to get a second chance. You certainly improved the article and for that I'm thankful, but maybe be a little less harsh on future articles, as I'm sure if Songs for the Deaf was drawn against one of the reviewers for the two articles I cited earlier, it'd be a GA already.  Red157  (talk • contribs) 00:42, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying to me so quickly. If it is truly down to breadth of coverage then I guess that bodes well for the future (Those plans in place for a sections about the tour/songs). I too am glad that getting a GA is becoming more difficult and was just slightly peeved that other reviewers were still passing unpassable articles. Don't worry, I won't go nominating it againt any time soon.  Red157  (talk • contribs) 10:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Rob Pelinka GAC on hold
I am ready for a review.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Live Forever
Brief reply over on the talk page. Thanks for taking a look at it. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Grimsby Town F.C. past squads and players
With regards, I did not create this page, I have contributed several times. But was not the original article creator --Footballgy (talk) 19:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Strawberry Fields Forever GA Review
Thank you very much for reviewing this article. As you could probably see, I've worked very hard on it, and appreciate the time you took to review it. I've addressed and fixed all the points of the review (covers section excluded), and have closed the Peer Review. I'd be very happy if you could make a final evaluation. All the best! Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 22:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 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) 06:01, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

West Bromwich Albion F.C. seasons
Thankyou for your comments at the FLC page of West Bromwich Albion F.C. seasons. I think I have now addressed all your comments, but I'm still struggling with how best to phrase the lead, and in particular how to introduce the list without self-referencing or sounding too false. I'd appreciate any ideas you have with this. Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 19:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. Struway2 gave me some very helpful pointers and I think it reads much better now. I'll wait to see what others come back with but I feel like I may be getting close to that first gold star. Let's see... --Jameboy (talk) 22:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Lewis Emanuel
Apparently he (or a bloke of the same name :-) played on trial for us yesterday, which is more than enough for some editors to decide he's signed... I've got him on my watchlist, but you got there first. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Wondering about a change
Hey. I noticed you've made a fair few edits to The Football League 2008-09 so I was wondering if you would take a look at this and see what you think of it? I'm just looking for thoughts at the moment, it's not a full-fledged proposition for change, but anything you add to the discussion would be great - even if it's just saying whether you like the idea or disagree with it. Thanks. Falastur2 Talk 22:57, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Hap Holmes/GA1
Hey Peanut4,

Thanks for your extensive review. I've done my best to address your concerns, and I'm ready for a second look. Thanks a lot,  Maxim (talk)  00:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've addressed your concerns once more. It's been substantially expanded; total article size was expanded by about 4,000 bytes. Of those 4,000 bytes, most of it was prose. The wordcount increased by 647, from 975 words to 1622 words.  Maxim (talk)  13:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I hate to be a pest, but can you take a look at the article? I'm going on WikiBreak starting next Saturday, and if there are still more issues that need fixing, I'd prefer to have more time between learning of them and Saturday. Thank you very much,  Maxim (talk)  21:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ready once more. :-)  Maxim (talk)  17:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Great Spotted Kiwi/GA1
Thanks for reviewing this article. I think I've done everything you've asked me to do, so could you take another look? Thanks, Shrewpelt (talk) 19:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review Request
Hey Peanut4, I currently have the article The Great American Bash (2005) up for Peer review. I come to you in hopes of you reviewing the article, as I'm aiming to get this article prepared for Featured Article status. I would really appreciate if you would take some time and review this article to the best of your abilities. Cheers, -- iMa tth ew  T.C. 23:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you by chance read over this message? -- iMa tth ew  T.C. 21:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Juanjo page
Sorry, very new to the wiki scene, I knew it was juanjo because I was at the game. but good work in finding the West Lothian courier article :)

(DieHardDiamond (talk) 10:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC))

Sorry
I think we clashed on Simpson and Delilah... sorry about that. I didn't put myself as reviewer because... well I'm too inexperienced to be doing reviews on my own, and thought it best just to leave some comments. But if you don't think it'll be a problem? Howdoyouturnthison (talk) 11:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Kansas City Chiefs quarterbacks on GA nomination
This isn't a list though! I have a substantial amount of background information that I believe makes it a stand alone article. It's not even titled "List of Kansas City Chiefs quarterbacks". Sure I know I list all the starters, but all the in-depth info should be notable. Sorry for misunderstanding if I am all wrong, though.  conman33  (. . .talk)  00:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I was just like "no way I went through all that writing for nothing!" haha. I totally understand.  conman33  (. . .talk)  01:01, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - August 2008
Delivered August 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage. → Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 23:07, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

GAs
Well done on bringing Sam Cowan and particularly Bradford City A.F.C. season 2007–08 to GA Status. Regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

italics
Wow thanks, I've been trying to find out the proper etiquete for ages - now I know. user:SE7User_talk:SE7/Special:Contributions/SE7 09:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

List of UEFA Cup winners
I've addressed your issue about the venue of the second leg, sorry I didn't address it earlier, anyway more comments would be welcome thanks NapHit (talk) 16:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Alan Shearer Peer Review
Howdy! I noticed you were listed at the volunteer's list, and have seen you on the WPF talk pages, would you be willing to contribute to the Alan Shearer article's peer review? Cheers, -  Toon  05  21:41, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

ordering of cat page links on bios
Hi. Wikipedia-wide, listing cat page links chronologically is not a common practice, and what is wrong is for a particular wikiproject to assert a particular style at odds with wikip-wide practice. Having said this though, there is no fully established and accepted way to list cat page links, and the idea of listing chronologically is an intriguing one (I hadn t considered till your message). Cat pages should certainly not be listed by perceived importance, as this breaches WP:NPOV, but chronological listing obviously doesn t breach this in any way, and it also better addresses that the names of cat pages can change and listing them alphabetically is utterly random. Chronological ordering has an order that is non-bias - sounds like just the thing - the question though is can it become as widely accepted across wikip as alphabetical or by perceived importance? Mayumashu (talk) 18:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Andy Cooke
Noticed you cleaning him up. Sorry if I left him in a mess, I got so fed up with this IP systematically removing metadata and other stuff from Darlington-related articles that I just reverted all their edits without actually looking at what I was reverting back to. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That was always the trouble with Mr Nelson, that he included good edits in with the disruptive stuff, so it wasn't obvious vandalism. That's why I've only been warning this one about the metadata deletion, which is clearly vandalism. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Ronnie Wallwork
Hey, glad you liked it. I think I'm gonna put Ronnie up for GA now, unless there's any more you'd like to add? I've been meaning to do so for a while but kept on finding new stuff to add. As you know the article has already been through peer review (thanks for your help there btw, I remember you addressed a a few of the comments), but maybe you could just check my last few edits, then if there's nothing major I'll put it up for GA nom. Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 22:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just logging off now, but I will incorporate your suggestions tomorrow and do the nomination. Cheers again. --Jameboy (talk) 22:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Glad you're on the ball tonight. If only British justice moved that swiftly! ... --Jameboy (talk) 21:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Footy Barnstar
I'm feeling generous today...

Re: Kirsten Dunst
I hope you meant this, if not, I'll keep looking. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright, I ended up fixing the sentence in the Career section. As for the lead, I ended up removing like three films, but the other ones are notable for her career and therefore should stay in the lead. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Question: Are you talking about paragraph 1, sentence 3 ---> "In 1990, Dunst starred in The Bonfire of the Vanities, in which she played Tom Hanks' daughter"? Because, the first two sentences do have context. Its cool, I mean you are the reviewer and you have the "power" if the article passes or not. :P --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hopefully, I got what you meant. If not, I'll keep trying. Question: Would it be subtle if this sentence read like this ---> "Dunst had a small role in the 1990 film, The Bonfire of the Vanities, in which she played Tom Hanks' daughter" or like this ---> "Dunst had a small role, in which she played Tom Hanks' daughter in the 1990 film, The Bonfire of the Vanities"? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, the Bonfire of the Vanities explains that she had a small role, in which she played Tom Hanks' daughter. If you want it removed, I'll remove it. Now, for the Virgins Suicides, I added a little more info. Finally, what's wrong with mentioning films that shes appeared in? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I get what you mean. Alright, I hope now, it goes with what your stating. Anyways, I doubt anyone is familiar with her being the voice of young Anastacia in the film. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

White-breasted Nuthatch
I think I've fixed all your concerns at the GAN now, thanks, jimfbleak (talk) 06:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

"Clocks"
I have addressed some of you concerns in the first section. But I have one question. Please check. Others concerns will be addressed the soonest time possible. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 09:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Peanut. I am really busy at school and having hard time focusing on this GA review. I might fail to address all of your suggestions in a week so Im asking if you can extend it? Thank you. --Efe (talk) 10:53, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I have all addressed your concerns. Please check. --Efe (talk) 12:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Nuthatch
Thanks for the review and pass. Is there a minimum length for FA? This is certainly shorter than my previous FAs, but there isn't much to add to what's there jimfbleak (talk) 15:14, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Frank Stapleton
It is very common to list players as retired in this fashion "Playing Position (retired)". Is there some other reason why you undid this revision ? Aaron carass (talk) 16:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Okey dokey. Aaron carass (talk) 01:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

X-Men (film)
All of your comments have been fixed. The article is now ready for GA status. &mdash;Wildroot (talk) 01:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hunter Mariners GA nominee
Thanks for gettin back on the nomination of Talk:Hunter Mariners. I have dones the suggestions at the Talk:Hunter Mariners/GA1 page. Thanks   The Windler      talk   09:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Bradford City kits
Regarding the 1911 kit, have a look at Historical Kits, which lists every City kit they've ever used, whereas the same site has City's current kit, which I'll amend as soon as I can. GiantSnowman 11:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Glebe (rugby league team)
Many thanks for responding to the nomination so quickly. I've addressed all your issues in one way or another - on a couple of instances I've left some comments/questions for you to help out on. The talk page where all this has been said is Talk:Glebe (rugby league team)/GA1. Cheers, MDM (talk) 05:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I must admit, I thought MOSNUM was something completely different when I first read your comments, so my apologies for not fixing it up the first time. Right now I think all your suggestions have been taken care of. MDM (talk) 12:46, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Updating league stats
Hey, I'm going on holiday tomorrow for (nearly) two weeks and so will be internet-less in that period, and I was wobndering if you'd mind updating the league stats in the 'Current players' section of the City players page? Cheers, GiantSnowman 12:39, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'm back today but am gone again tomorrow, but should be back on Tuesday so I'll take up my usual job then! Thanks again, your help is much appreciated! GiantSnowman 18:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Los Angeles Lakers
Hi, i expanded the article, took out pictures, is it GA quality yet? If not, please tell me what's still wrong with it. I hope the grammar is the only problem. Blu  e  Red 23:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks, but is the grammar all right, i don't have very good grammar, and what sections needs to be expanded? Blu  e  Red  23:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ive already listed it in peer review. I saw the blazers and Toronto Raptors, i tried to made it like the blazer article. Thanks for your suggestions. Blu  e  Red  00:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Calgary Cannons GAN
Howdy! I have responded to your comments at Talk:Calgary Cannons/GA1. Thanks for the review! Resolute 01:04, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

David Morse
Is everything alright, I posted a comment on the David Morse talk page three days ago, you haven't replied yet. -- Music 26/  11  11:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Bradford history
Hey Peanut, I'll try to finish the review of the Bradford history tomorrow, hope it's been useful so far. I've a nasty feeling I've broken my ankle a bit so I may be busy tomorrow sorting that out, but I'll do my best to get back to you! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries - I'll get back and offer an opinion in the next couple of days. Ankle - torn ligament. Ouch.  8 weeks of ibuprofen and limping.  Charming! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Sid Luckman
Appreciate very much your input at this article regarding reaching GA. I think all of the bits you suggested have been seen to and would appreciate your second opinion on what further (if anything) is needed. Best wishes.-- VS talk 11:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you and best wishes.-- VS talk 21:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

1995 Pacific Grand Prix
Hi. My previous project, the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix successfully became an FA last week. Having noticed your name on the peer review volunteers list, I was wondering whether you could review the 1995 Pacific Grand Prix article, leaving comments on the peer review page. Kind regards, D.M.N. (talk) 14:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Windass
I'll do a B-class review on it as soon as I get chance, and happy to contribute to any further review, but just logging off now. I've been doing quite a lot of article assessment lately. I want to get the Unassessed articles down to zero for the England task force, although even that won't tell the whole story as I know there's a lot out there that haven't been tagged at all. But of the articles we have tagged at WP:EFTF, we are at around 95% assessed, which isn't bad. (btw I thought we deserved a shortcut, hence I grabbed WP:EFTF. Not sure if we're supposed to tell anyone, but the page didn't exist so it seemed OK to do) --Jameboy (talk) 23:54, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Albert White (basketball)/GA1
I have repied at Talk:Albert White (basketball)/GA1. I also added back the header template for readers who may be arriving at the page from a piped link.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I have added back the hatnote per WP:NAMB. It seems to me that with three athletes on the dab page a link could easily direct someone to the page with text like "many remember Albert White as one of the great athletes of his generation."  This is a new article and who knows what types of links may direct here in the future, but piped links referring to him as an athlete instead of a basketball player could easily lead a reader to the wrong place.  If I am misinterpreting the directions under this part of the page let me know.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Technically, that is how that section reads, so you are correct. I am just thinking that with three athletes someone might be looking for one of the others when clicking on this one.  It is your final decision to make since you are in charge here.  I don't see a problem with an additional hatnote, but understand its removal.  I think adding it would do no harm, but removing it might be slightly more in line with guidelines.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

History article
Was looking at History of Bradford City A.F.C., one thing I noticed was the use of commas seemed a bit inconsistent in places (sorry, it's the sort of thing I do notice). E.g. in the Early successes section
 * Several football clubs, including Bradford (Park Avenue) also adopted the code needs one after "including BPA" to pair the one before it
 * James Whyte, a sub-editor of the Bradford Observer met with needs one after "Observer", likewise
 * one of the club's centre-halves Peter O'Rourke was appointed manager needs a pair round "Peter O'Rourke"

etc. And in the cite-templates, you've fairly consistently put newspapers and club websites as  rather than. I'd be happy to go through it and sort them out if you like (I don't mean re-punctuate the whole thing or anything stupid, just add the odd comma where one is obviously missing and fix the cites), or shall I mention it at the FAC so you can either disagree or do it yourself, or what? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:52, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If you look at the talk page, the confusion shown at Template talk:Cite news and Template talk:Cite news proves how unhelpful the documentation for undefined is. However, the Telegraph & Argus is one of many works published by Newsquest Media Group, and Bradford City official website is a work published by Bradford City AFC, so logically if you refer to the Telegraph & Argus or to BCAFC official site they should be referred to as works (at least in my opinion; if no-one else queries it then perhaps I'm wrong). As you replied to the hyphen thing at the FAC page I'll answer that there. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 22:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Grebe
Many thanks again, jimfbleak (talk) 05:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Lakers
Hey sorry to bother you, but can you please review the Los Angeles Lakers article again, i made it longer and added sources, i hope its just the grammar this time. Thanks. Blu  e  Red 08:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 05:38, 23 August 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) 05:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Michigan Wolverines men's basketball/GA1
I have responded at Talk:Michigan Wolverines men's basketball/GA1. If you are promoting GAs, please try to promote this article before Albert White. This is a much better 100th GA.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:02, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI, Michigan Wolverines men's basketball is up for GAC2.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:52, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Copy-edit request: History of Bradford City A.F.C.
Thanks for the message. If you give me a few days I would be happy to take a look at the article. – ukexpat (talk) 19:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Great news on the promotion to FA, congratulations! I will still take a look at in over the next couple of days. – ukexpat (talk) 02:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

College football GANs
Just want to thank you for tackling the task of those three GANs I submitted. I know it can be rather dense, but it is greatly appreciated. I hate to ask anything more, but I'm also preparing 2005 Sugar Bowl to face the FAC gauntlet, and if you have a spare moment, I'd really appreciate any thoughts or comments you might have on that article as well -- particularly in regard to its readability. Again, thank you. JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:29, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay; changes have been made to 1986 Peach Bowl. Let me know if it meets your approval. Thanks! JKBrooks85 (talk) 23:04, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I believe that I also need to apply the convert template to measurements in the other two as well. JKBrooks85 (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that; 1984 Independence Bowl fixes have been made. It's been kinda crazy lately. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Scott Carson
Just a note to say thanks for your comments at the Scott Carson peer review. I'll try to address the points you made sometime during this week. Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 23:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Arsenal FC squad
Hi there - you recently contributed to this thread at WT:WPF. Could you possibly spare the time to contribute the same thoughts to Talk:Arsenal F.C.? I'm having to deal with one particularly zealous user there who is calling me a vandal (while themselves deleting the discussion) and more reasoned and measured contributions to the discussion would be very much welcome. Thanks. Qwghlm (talk) 22:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Bradford City FA/GA
Thanks for the update, very nice work, all your hard work is much appreciated! GiantSnowman 12:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Croatia national team: Reply
Thanks for your message. I understand what your trying to say, but I still feel you may have a slightly blinded idea about the situation. I most likely will take this to GA if it fails FA now. But the fact remains that the nomination candidate page is almost deliberately being treated differently compared to that of other pages. It's similar to what I said on the talk page of the project. Some people merely react to a nomination based on the subject itself, not on the merits of the article. Surely one has to admit that there is a little bit of unnecessary flame going on. Countless issues were addressed on the nomination page and I fixed them all up completely. I even went through all the trouble to find extra references based on the most obvious and non-published rare information (regarding the volatility statement). On top of that, I tweaked everything to the way it was recommended, some of the users even edited the page themselves to fix it up. Yet there was still not a single support in return. The image issue is more ridiculous than anything I've ever seen! One user asked for an appropriate source on some of the images, and I clearly provided the sources with relevant links and author information etc. He then commented and said that some images may have inappropriate copyright tags on them. I asked him to specify such and recommend which tags should be added, his reply was an instant 'Oppose' based on 'inappropriate image use' even though I had clearly met all his stated comments and requirements.

Surely you can't call that fair. I assume good faith where I see good faith. I see good faith in you right now trying to resolve this situation, but I don't see or assume good faith in users who ruin the nomination with unstoppable 'Opposes' based on issues which are clearly already resolved. Don't even get me started on Fasach Nua. All I will say that as usual, it is evident that the majority of people (I'd estimate about 95%) disagree with his argument and it is therefore not an applicable one. Domiy (talk) 04:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion re: BCAFC league table
I've been reading a few of the club season articles recently. The quality of these varies quite a bit, and many seem to attract new users who seem to use them as fan pages, though we all have to start somwehere I guess. But it's good to see that Bradford City A.F.C. season 2007–08 is a Good Article and I think it sets a good benchmark for this type of article. Just a quick suggestion regarding the league table in the article though. As the article is about Bradford City's season, would a grey table with a single claret and/or amber band across Bradford's row not be more appropriate? All the other colouring is appropriate to the promoted/relegated/play-off teams only (fine for an article about the division/league as a whole), but in terms of this article I want Bradford's league position to leap out at me ... or maybe not :-) Just a thought. I've managed to tag another 60 or so lists for WP:EFTF since the last article count was run, which makes me wonder how many more are out there. Certainly there must be hundreds more articles untagged so I'll keep plugging away. I've also made a start on the PR comments for Scott Carson and should be done fairly soon hopefully, so thanks again for your comments. --Jameboy (talk) 10:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I added an amber band and removed the existing colours, see what you think. I tried to bold the club name as well but this seemed to break the template. By the way I was wondering if you had any thoughts on 2007–08 in English football, which I've started tinkering with recently (although there is still much to do). I've moved the bulleted list of events into prose (still need to lose a few bullet points though), and have generally tried to create sub-sections for the various competitions that point to the relevant daughter articles. I'm thinking about adding an "off-field events" section, that could possibly include stadia developments. The lists of deaths, retirements and managerial changes bother me though as I haven't a clue what - if anything - to do with them. Any input would be welcome. --Jameboy (talk) 20:36, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Fabian Delph
Hope I'm doing this right. His D/O/B is 21/11/1989, not 05/05/1991. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.84.48 (talk) 20:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2008
Delivered September 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage. → Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 10:10, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
many thanks, just wish all the FAC reviewers agreed jimfbleak (talk) 06:24, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Rothmans
Cheers for the offer of assistance. Literally all I need is the page numbers from the 87/88 and 88/89 editions upon which the preceding season's appearance/goals data for Norwich City are found, so that I can reference those seasons in the table in Steve Bruce's article. If you were able to find those page numbers for me that would be fantastic!!!!!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Wallwork review / tennis WAGs
"To be honest, I much prefer yours." - that's just what Federer said to Murray.... --Jameboy (talk) 23:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for all your help with the Wallwork article. As you probably spotted, it is now a GA. Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 22:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 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) 21:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review
Hello, I am wondering if you could peer reviewed the following sport article Larry O'Brien Championship Trophy at Peer review/Larry O'Brien Championship Trophy/archive1. Thanks—Chris! ct 20:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Farnall
Created a very stubby stub for Thomas Farnall, who's one of yours. Maybe your books know more about him than mine do, suspect they can't know less :-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:28, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Both Matthews and Joyce have 1871. If it was just Matthews, I might think 1876 was more likely. If he joined Blues in 1895 aged 24, I'd expect more than one previous club, especially the way he went on to change club every five minutes, whereas aged 19 I wouldn't. And to be still playing at 35+ wasn't all that common in those days. Dunno. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Thanks
Thanks for your help with this one: --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Contractions
Sorry about that, I was just going with the British English way, since Coldplay are a British band and stuff. Totally sorry for my part. I've got the stuff for "In My Place". --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:36, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright, again, sorry for my part. The songs were my first in the British English style, just wanted to go by that. Also, I responded to your comments at "God Put a Smile upon Your Face". --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Cool then. I responded to both reviews. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Homer to the Max
I did your changes, please check the note on the page  C t j f 8 3 Talk 03:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Eugene Martinez
Hi Peanut, you have justed edited the Eugene Martinez article, and said that he played for Harrogate Town. However, Neil Brown says he played for Harrogate Railway...maybe he played for both? Cheers, GiantSnowman 20:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 15, 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) 05:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

James Waite
His birth certificate says "Jamie Waite", as per a search on findmypast.com. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Quality website, I think it sould be included in the WP:FOOTY link collection personally. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Real Madrid C.F. FAC
Hi Peanut, your issues within Real Madrid C.F. FAC have been resolved. Please check them as soon as you can. Thanks.--KSA13 08:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)