User talk:Peanut4/Archive 4

Steve Bruce
Cheers for your comments, all addressed now I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support !vote -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - October 2008
Delivered October 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage. → Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 11:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Beaded Lizard
Thanks for your review!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

A Rush of Blood to the Head and X&Y
Well, I don't if its my browser, since I got the stuff at the review and hasn't been shown, but I got your concerns at both reviews. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Please check both if its ok now. Thanks Peanut. --Efe (talk) 12:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you Peanut for passing X&Y. --Efe (talk) 05:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for passing A Rush. --Efe (talk) 01:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/October 2008
Well, you'll know this sooner or later, so I might as well tell you the news now. There won't be any GAN backlog elimination drive until GA Sweeps is over. You can see the explanation on WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/Fall 2007 and its talk page. But in short, we won't have it because such drives will add a lot more GAs than the current rate, which will create more burden towards the already-shorthanded Sweeps. OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

RE:GA reviews
Thanks for the praise. I will hopefully be able to help out in the near future (probably early November), but right now my schedule is full packed. The Le ft orium  14:11, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Lisa on Ice
Lisa on Ice has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.

re GA assessment of Bob Miller (1957–1974 pitcher)
I have addressed the overwhelming majority of the issues you raised at Talk:Bob Miller (1957–1974 pitcher)/GA1 and I think it may be ready for a second look. I appreciate the comments, and the changes triggered by your input provided useful guidance on both policy and content issues that have clearly improved the article already. At your convenience, can you please review the article and make sure that I am heading in the right direction. Alansohn (talk) 04:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I went through the baseball Good Articles and there is little to model someone like Miller, who achieved his longevity not through stardom, but through being an extra arm that many teams could make use of. If you can suggest any article that would be a helpful model to expand this one, I would be most appreciative. Alansohn (talk) 05:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the formatting tweaks on Miller. Let me know if there is anything else I should correct or expand. Alansohn (talk) 20:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Paddy Moran (ice hockey)/GA1
I don't if you've noticed, but I've made my best to address your concerns there.  Maxim (talk)  20:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this is the most comprehensive biography of Moran there is out there; the lives of hockey players from the 1900s and 1910s weren't covered intensively. I believe that the article covers the vast majority of the facts know about Moran, covering the most important points. I personally believe there should be a line drawn between criterion 3 of GA and criterion 1b of FAs. This has no chance for FA because his personal life is poorly known, but for a GA I personally believe that it is sufficient.  Maxim (talk)  21:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

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

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

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Wallwork
Someone appears to have translated the whole article into Polish for the Polish Wikipedia, references and all. Absolutely fantastic. I can't understand a word of it, but I'm sure it is spot on! Should be a shoe-in for GA (or "DA" as I believe it is in Polish) over there I'd have thought. --Jameboy (talk) 18:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The language barrier prevents me from doing much but I left a message with the user, suggesting he nominate it. --Jameboy (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Smiley Award
Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Elipongo/SmileyAward--Unionhawk (talk) 21:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

 For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award (Explanation and Disclaimer)


 * And also,

Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness
I've addressed all your points in the GA review. Thanks for reviewing it. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:24, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Hughie Lehman/GA1
I've done my best to address your concerns; I hope the prose is better now, if not, I can find another user with fresher eyes to look over it.  Maxim (talk)  02:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: GA assessment of Paranoid Android
I addressed all of the points you brought up, although it doesn't show up on the talk page for some wacky reason. --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 21:01, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Talk page needed purging, for the record (servers have been slow of late). And while I'm here...

Thank You (Bicycle Kick)
I'm surprised that no one else has done this, specially considering all the other "concerned editors" that have been editing the bicycle kick article along with me. I would like to thank you for all your improvements and input for the bicycle kick article. Your neutral edits have certainly made quite an impact. Please do continue with your edits if you see them fit and necessary. I will continue to add more sources, but at this moment have to take some time to concentrate on some "real life" work. Once again, thank you for your edits and all your help.--&#91;&#124;!*//MarshalN20\\*!&#124;&#93; (talk) 03:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Bradford City A.F.C.
Hi, noticed that you have done some editing to the article. I have just done some copy edits on the article but wondered if you could shed some light on the sentence "The first investigation was in 1952, following the 1946 Burnden Park disaster, which resulted in the closure of the stand". The word investigation does not appear to be explained and the the resulting sentence does not make sense to me in its context. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 12:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

The Horse
Cool, cheers. As I was discussing with Struway, I had some doubts about my Matthews book in the case of Horsfield, so if you can find some decent sources with correct dates we can adjust the article and infobox accordingly. --Jameboy (talk) 00:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like you found some good stuff there, I'll have a proper look through tomorrow. --Jameboy (talk) 00:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

"Trouble" review
I attended a conference. Thanks for the review. --Efe (talk) 08:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I'm done. Please check. --Efe (talk) 06:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for passing the article to GA status. --Efe (talk) 07:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Craig Armstrong
Woops! Should have made myself clearer, that fact tag was referring to the claim that he was without a club for some time, which Soccerbase cotradicts. Regards, HornetMike (talk) 08:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Horsfield
Hi, I'd read that, but not sure it does help... It could imply either he was only there for five months in total, or it could imply it was five months from picking up the injury that he went to Halifax, but either way there are time-gaps which remain to be filled. At the moment, I've written in the article that he joined Halifax in Oct 96, but am about to try to check that; he made his debut in Oct, but might have joined sooner and been getting fit. Safest to be vague, I think. Thanks anyway, Struway2 (talk) 15:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reviewing and passing Grampa vs. Sexual Inadequacy! =) I hereby award you with

Nice try
OK, now undo your edit on the talk page. You know which one. Gimmetrow 21:19, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Brenda Song GAR
This is just a note to say that I have set up a GAR for Brenda Song here. This would seem the right way to air any differences that there may be concerning that article's recent GA review. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:25, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Copyedit request
Can you copyedit No Way Out (2004)? If possible, thank you.-- S R X  21:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's alright, thank you anyways :)-- S R X  21:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

2008 Belgian Grand Prix GAN
Do you mind if I ask you to take a look over the page again? It has undergone a fairly vigorous day of editing, and I feel that we can't have missed anything major. I am pretty new at these shenanigans (I'm sure that's not how you spell it) so if I am being presumptuous here I apologise in advance. Apterygial (talk) 11:24, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Please note my question on the talk page. Cheers, Apterygial (talk) 06:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Again, I think we are there now. Apterygial (talk) 01:10, 31 October 2008 (UTC) This page really is not going to change. It had no bearing on the Championship result and what you see now you'll probably see in a week from now. Apterygial (talk) 00:11, 5 November 2008 (UTC) OK. Thanks. I just wanted to make sure you weren't waiting on us to let you know when the article was ready. Apterygial (talk) 00:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I've adressed your concerns on the page. Apterygial (talk) 23:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

natural-born citizenship in the United States
Thanks for your thoughts on &#8220;natural-born citizenship.&#8221; I know you don&rsquo;t want to get bogged-down in an extended discussion at WP:GACC/Nominations, but why not comment on the article talk page instead? If you do so, then please feel free to overwrite my most recent comment. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 05:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

GA review of Back to the Future
Thanks for reviewing. I'm the editor who placed it at nomination. Anyway, before I had a chance, Alientraveller and another editor addressed your concerns. I think it's ready. Cheers. Wildroot (talk) 21:00, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Expanded the lead to three paragraphs and corrected the release section. :) Alientraveller (talk) 22:41, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, the article is now ready. Wildroot (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I addressed your concerns with the "Casting" section. Wildroot (talk) 22:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Lisa's First Word
Well, I already replied there, and I'm doing what I said I would. Tezkag72 (talk) 02:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I finished the review in one 15-minute edit, which involved me having an extra window open to look at the article while I was reviewing. There was no time when it was "on review." But thanks anyway. Tezkag72 (talk) 02:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip! I've been on the wiki since December 2007, but I'm still getting used to stuff here. Tezkag72 (talk) 03:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Moving FA Cup 19XX-19XX to FA Cup 19XX–19XX
Hi, I noticed that you moved FA Cup 1955-56 to FA Cup 1955–56, which given the policy sounds fair enough - I assumed that that would happen at some point! However, if this is important, would you mind please moving the rest of the pages and also update the Template too, as the template now isn't bolding the 1955-56 article as a result of the move? Cheers. El Pollo Diablo (Talk) 11:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - November 2008
Delivered November 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage. → Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 06:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
You might have noticed a new button appear on diffs and page histories. After looking to see whether some of the most trustworthy WPF regulars have it, I've just boldly given you the rollback tool for quick vandal reversion (see WP:ROLL for details). In fact rather than just rollback, you're a longstanding contributor with a fine track record, would you find admin tools of use? If so, I'm more than willing to nominate you. Oldelpaso (talk) 18:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

GAN backlog elimination drive
Thanks for organizing and overseeing this initiative. I learned a lot while doing it, and it encouraged me to finally review articles in areas that I had previously avoided. I just wrapped up my final review today, so they're ready for you to take a look at when you have a chance. Please don't feel rushed, as I'm in no hurry. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

MOS/POV?
I see you prefer the earlier description of Paul Henderson (which I typed in early 2008), instead of the recent version I did in an attempt to make it easier to read and understand. But may I know what is "in line with MOS" and POV?

Horsfield PR
Hi, and thanks for the review. I've had a bit of a fiddle with the lead section and was wondering if you could have a quick glance when you have a moment to see if it's improved at all. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * As the lead says, he's a former footballer; if that changes, the edit can be undone easily enough. thanks, Struway2 (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Leeds Road, Huddersfield
Hi, I have moved this back to Leeds Road because that was the name of the stadium; it was never known as Leeds Road, Huddersfield. There are numerous precedents - Brisbane Road etc. Also, Leeds Road was the result of a WP:RM. If you are unhappy please raise a further RM. TerriersFan (talk) 21:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No need to send me the note. I totally agree with your reversion of the page move and believe Leeds Road to be the correct page title. I'm just annoyed I forgot about the original RM when the recent incorrect move was made, since I had to trawl through half the pages which were incorrectly pointing to the wrong page. Peanut4 (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops! I should have had more regard to the fact that you were simply carrying out helpful housekeeping. I apologise for my insensitive wording. TerriersFan (talk) 22:17, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

List of goalscoring goalkeepers
Thanks for your fixes, not having such a good day today! Might do something else for a while, like wash the dishes! EA210269 (talk) 02:36, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

GA Review: Brandon Roy
I just nominated the article and your already reviewing it - thanks! A talk  03:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Josh Gray
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Josh Gray, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Dicklyon (talk) 22:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Athlete notability
I hadn't noticed the WP:ATHLETE exception to the usual WP:NOTE rule that significant coverage in independent sources is required. It seems odd that a person can be deemed notable simply by virtue of playing on a team, even if nobody notices them enough to write about them. Ah, well, nobody ever said wikipedia was fair or sensible. Dicklyon (talk) 01:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Box lacrosse
Thanks for the review. I believe we've addressed all of your concerns. I left some notes and a couple questions for you on the review page. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks again! mitico (talk) 20:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

RC Strasbourg page
Hi, I saw that you did some edits on the RC Strasbourg page following my request for an assessment of this article. First of all, thanks for these edits, I am not yet totally WP-litterate so it definitely helps to have others people taking the time to check my work. However, I'm a bit disappointed because the article is still rated as a "start". If you have some time to spare, perhaps you could tell me what I should do to improve it and obtain a better status ? Zitelli67 (talk) 00:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Reply
I apologize - I mainly use that to tell myself I've completed those tasks. I'll use the check mark next time. By the way, thanks for your review - it was unbelievably thorough. A talk  01:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, Peanut4. I hope this isn't much of a burden, but could you help me out a bit? I've done most of what you said, but I left some stuff due to fear of doing something wrong (which could cause the article's failure), but could you just tell me what to do? I'll fix it - you've done a lot already. Thanks in advance, A  talk  21:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks a million! a talk 00:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Ireland cricket team
I think I've addressed most of the points you raised in the GA review. Off the top of my head, the only outstanding issue is overlinking which I'd appreciate your advice on. Nev1 (talk) 15:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the pass! Nev1 (talk) 03:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Tom Jones
Thanks mate. Good idea. I usually change the links on my subpage to match the players' actual articles anyway, but thanks for the thought. – PeeJay 22:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Peer review
Any help would be appreciated here. Libro0 (talk) 20:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Bert Olmstead
I replied to your question/concerns/et cetera.-- Maxim (talk)  00:40, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied again.-- Maxim (talk)  00:16, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

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) 10:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Could you be my copyeditor?
Greetings, Peanut4. I see you have written a couple of FAs and several GAs, mostly about Bradford City A.F.C. Well done - your contributions are greatly appreciated!

I am writing several GAs about Singaporean sportspeople, mainly footballers. However, I need a copy-editor as my English is only at a near-native standard. Your high-quality contributions to articles about Bradford City A.F.C. suggest that you are British and thus a native speaker of British English. So could you be my copy-editor?

While most article writers submit complete articles and then have them copyedited, I prefer "interactive copyediting", where after telling you the article to copyedit:
 * I would e-mail you drafts in advance.
 * We would book copyediting sessions at times convenient for both of us. The frequency of copyediting sessions would usually be once a week, but if we have more free time (for example, during the school holidays for me), we can hold copyediting sessions more often. Each session would usually last one to two hours.
 * Copyediting sessions would take place through IRC (freenode), MSN Messenger or Google Talk. During copyediting sessions, we would go through every sentence, correcting errors and refining the prose, before I submit it. You could ask me to clarify the context (since I would probably be more familiar with the subject of the article) and intended meaning of errorneous sentences, while I could ask you to expain the intricacies of English grammar - and we could chat as well.

If you are interested, please let me know so we can exchange IRC/MSN/GTalk handles and get started. I already have a complete draft of a short article about Singaporean Paralympic swimmer Yip Pin Xiu; a few copyediting sessions for that article would let us get to know each other and get used to each other's style.

P.S. In case you were wondering, I noticed you during your GA reviews of several articles about Singaporean Olympic sportspeople written by my Wikifriend, Jacklee, for which you deserve a barnstar.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:19, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

GA Reviews
Cheers. I've done a few PRs before, which gave me an idea of how to look at an article. I'm interested in doing more reviews, but at this stage I'm just trying to move the queue on a little (I've got an article near the bottom!) Apterygial talkstalkinsane idea 00:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I never thanked you for your GAR on the Belgian GP article. I think I thought that you were evil ;) at the time! Apterygial talkstalkinsane idea 00:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - December 2008
Delivered December 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an * before your username on the Project Mainpage.

→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 00:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Good Article Nom
Hello, if you have time, would you mind taking a look at Stephens City, Virginia. I nom'd it for Good Article Status a couple days ago. It is under "Places" on the Good Article Nom page. Thanks... NeutralHomer •  Talk  • December 2, 2008 @ 19:32

Hiya Peanut
I didn't reply at WT:FAC (I need to see more support, and gather some statistics), so I'll reply here: I basically agree. People at FAC have generally decided that any article that is good enough for WP:N is good enough for FA. The question is what kind of shape the article is in, how engaging it is; that's not a settled question. I'll go gather some data. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 21:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Maggie Gyllenhaal FAC
Hi Peanut, listen, I want to ask a favor, do you remember saying this ---> "Everything looks good now and a sound basis for expansion and a possible future FAC bid"? If it comes back to you, do you think you might have time to comment on Maggie Gyllenhaal's FAC, since there has been no feedback for a while. I would appreciate your comments, since you did promote the article to GA status, regarding the article, and anything that needs to be fixed. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Gunnar Halle
My Norwegian's not what it might be (or at all), but I think this says that Rosler and Halle have gone to Lyn as manager and assistant, or manager and coach, or something. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd have done the same. Just that I'd vaguely noticed Halle's name earlier today when looking for something else entirely, so had another look when I spotted your rv. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Sunderland A.F.C. PR
Hi, I've just responded to some comments from the peer review, I was wondering if you could get back to me on them. Sunderland06 (talk) 14:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll have a look through my book and expand those periods tomorrow. Cheers. Sunderland06  (talk) 15:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well thats precisely the article I've been working on recently, I'm looking for a copyedit then I'll be placing it at peer review. :) Cheers. Sunderland06  (talk) 15:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi again, I've expanded the article to fill in the gaps in time. I think I've got a good balance now, would you mind having a once over? Cheers. Sunderland06  (talk) 18:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and trimmed it down as suggested, cheers for your time. Sunderland06 (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eddie Johnson (English footballer)
The article Eddie Johnson (English footballer) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Eddie Johnson (English footballer) for things needed to be addressed. Kaiser matias (talk) 02:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

York Park
Hey, I've fixed some of the minor issues on the page. Can you give your opinion on the article's rating? Aaroncrick (talk) 10:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Cheers
Just to say cheers for helping out with the page move admin re: Football League play-off articles. I have a thumping hangover and am finding everything difficult and slow today so the help is appreciated! --Jameboy (talk) 13:59, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers, getting there slowly. There is arguably still a slight inconsistency in that FA Cup and League Cup finals have "Final" capitalised (2008 FA Cup Final vs 2008 Football League Championship play-off final), but maybe that's a discussion for another day. Achieving internal consistency within the play-off articles is probably the first priority. --Jameboy (talk) 14:39, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

2008 Japanese Grand Prix
Hi. I don't know how willing you would be to look at another of my Grand Prix pages :), but the above article is currently up for PR here. I would really appreciate any comments you could have on it, and am more than willing to return the favour on anything that you are working on. Cheers, Aptery  gial  02:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Let me know if you need a hand with anything. Aptery  gial  02:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to exploit that offer! (and keep this request under this header, feel free to move it). 2008 Brazilian Grand Prix passed its GA review today. I've been on and off considering taking it to FAC for a while, and had it peer reviewed as such. What's your view? I guess my main questions would be about the quality of the prose, and the presence of jargon. I have no intention of taking to FAC an article that isn't ready. Aptery  gial  09:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I'll nominate it. I've gone through it a couple of times and given it a copyedit, so I'm comfortable with the prose. I don't think another PR would be all that useful; to this point I've had six editors (not including you or me) go through and copyedit it, and a PR may not add that much. Wish me luck! Aptery  gial  02:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ...And it passed. Very happy. Aptery  gial  05:05, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Shaun Goater
I noticed that you put reference tags on sections of Shaun Goater, or rather I didn't notice, seeing as you did it a month ago. The article is of my hand (almost literally - its my hand he's shaking in the photo :) ), but it was promoted in 2006, which probably makes it prehistoric in GA terms and accounts for the lower citation density. Could you perhaps slap a few s on it so that I can bring it in line? Oldelpaso (talk) 20:15, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Scout (association football)
Hi, I have started the abovementioned article, which is already fairly substantial (at least, better than stub quality) and hoping for your peer review and input please. I have already gone around to check in the football wiki but have not found anything similar. Thanks. Veinofstars (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Bradford footage
Looked at the link rules page.

What should be linked: 3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues.

The footage, being a live news report, is certainly a neutral and accurate source that cannot be directly inserted into the Wiki. Coolgamer (talk) 00:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I will admit my bias in the matter, I strongly feel that footage such as this should be available to the people. However, as long as it is mentioned that the footage is available, I am fine with it. Would you object to a still picture of the event? Coolgamer (talk) 17:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Charlie Quayle
Yes, according to the book I've referenced it was City. Possible that he was only there a short time if he's not in any of your books, but generally the joyce book is better than most. WikiGull (talk) 13:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Christmas
Merry Christmas to you as well, much obliged for the Barnstar. And you're right - shame about the draw, but at least we're still in the playoffs...GiantSnowman 16:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Jack Barker
Hi Peanut4, I am new to trying to edit a Wikipedia article so please bear with me! There are some factual errors in the article about John William "Jack" Barker, which have been noticed by his son, Jack Barker. I have tried to edit these to correct them but the changes are being undone! How I do I go about ensuring that the article is correct? Did you write the original article? Thanks David Shn606 (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi again Peanut4, His son Jack Barker is my Father-in-law; is he deemed a reliable source about his father's life? e.g. the information about his "Family" is incorrect (he didn't have a younger brother Jeffrey nor a nephew John). I also have his father's birth and death certificates. Cheers David Shn606 (talk) 22:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, Well, the problem is his son hasn't written a book about his father and the birth certificate obviuously isn't in a book either. I would have thought that somewhere along the line Wikipedia could recognise that errors can be made in a book and also that there should be some mechanism of correcting such inaccuracies. Have you any suggestions about how we can get these inaccuracies corrected? I presume that if you have written a large part of it, you too might want to see the article factually correct! For example have you actually checked on the club 'Denaby Rovers' which Jack Barker is supposed to have played for? At best it is perhaps a Junior Sunday side. Denaby United was the club with all the history in Denaby and is the one he played for. I realise that you have now way of knowing who I am, but if there is a way of posting to you his birth certificate or some photographs his son has of his father (for example shaking hands as captain before the Wales match in Cardiff in 1936) or even photographs of his 'caps' you will perhaps accept he is a valid source of information about his father! I hope you can help. David Shn606 (talk) 23:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)