User talk:PeterSymonds/Archive 3

London Gazette
No problems - thank you for fixing the one I maanged to leave the parameters out of. It is useful becaue hopefully the next time they change their website as they did last Ocotber, we'll be able to magically fix all the urls by fixing the template instead of having to fix every one manually (I think there are still 100+ broken references from teh last website change). I had tried to draw attention to the template via a few likely seeming WikiProjects, so if you can think of any others that might be interested, do spread the word. David Underdown (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll PR
Well, certainly outside my usual areas of expertise but I'll happily add some comments from an outside perspective! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Peter, I found it fascinating. I've added a whole bunch of trivial bits and pieces to the peer review, hopefully some of them will be of use to you!  Feel free to shout at me now or in the future for this or anything else!  The Rambling Man (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Template:British princesses
Hi Peter; I do not know how to add another box for a note at the top. I feel that the note at the bottom is fine where it is but I will add an asterix or some other sort of mark at the first generation to draw the reader's attention to the bottom. Charles 22:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Turns out there was a field available at the top of the template that I used. Take a look and tell me what you think. Charles 22:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I've been categorised a lot worse than being called a "princess". As long as they don't put me in a box yet.:)--Docg 22:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:RFR
I've granted your request for rollback. In addition, I'm fascinated by your user name - are you an Old Symondian ? Pedro : Chat  20:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow! I actually went to college there (hence my interest) so that's quite a wild coincidence! Any how, enjoy rollback, feel free to ask me if you need any help, and keep on enjoying being a Wikipedian - your contributions are great and maybe in the future you may want to consider this .... Pedro : Chat  21:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Stratellite
Hi, I noticed that you reverted an edit by to the article Stratellite. I was wondering whether you could take a look at edits he has made since then, and see whether you think they were deconstructive. I'm not sure, and would appreciate a second opinion. Thanks. --GW_SimulationsUser Page 21:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I just wanted a second opinion because of the substantial nature of the changes he was making, linked with his history of vandalism to the page, and his username, which suggested a potential COI. I'll leave him be for now, unless he blanks it again. For the record, the other "inappropriate edits" which you mentioned seemed to be exactly the same as the one you reverted. --GW_SimulationsUser Page 21:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Peter, thank you. I am going to sign the edits. Still new to Wikipedia and its various functions, still learning how to get around on the system. Strateditor (talk) 22:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

In response to your comment on my talk page, I'll have a look tomorrow morning, and post a few fact tags if needed. --GW_SimulationsUser Page 22:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Curtana
Hi,

I didn't realize there was more to it than the ones in the Crown Jewels, thanks for correcting.

Cheers,

Sidi —Preceding unsigned comment added by $yD! (talk • contribs) 20:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

London Gazette pages
You need to use the "real" page number given in the &pgn parameter of the url (and what's actually printed as the page number), rather than the numbering in the navigation pane, which justs counts the first page of each issue as 1. The normal practice (apart from in early issues) is to re-start page numbering with the first issue of each year (and these days Honours list supplements are numbered independently) and continue numbering in sequence, regardless of issue breaks. I've fixed one for you. If you just delete the &pgn=nn from the url, you shoudl get taken to the first page of the issue, then use the drop-down to get to the page you want, and check what the page number is (if that makes sense). David Underdown (talk) 11:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Template issue
Thanks for fixing the template issue at Talk:2007 Texas Longhorn football team. I see now that there is not a way to indicate that a third nomination is pending. We need to wait until the 3rd nomination concludes one way or the other. Best, Johntex\talk 22:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Respond to PeterSymonds. Re: Milton Friedman
Hi, thanks for the help! I'm going to need all the help I can get to make this into a viable FA article, but I hope it succeeds. I'm continuing to go through the points that you've listed in the FAC page and hopefully will be done soon. Please reply to my comments there if I am missing anything, thanks! Also, how long does the FAC process usually last? Of course, I'd love to have it last for as long it needs to in order for the article to become an FA, but I'm curious as to the 'average' time that an article is listed in FAC. Gary King (talk) 20:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note of recommendation, but now that I'm Raul's delegate to promote/archive articles, I generally avoid commenting on articles at FAC until consensus has developed. (But that article has numerous MOS issues.  See Index of Economic Freedom to eliminate one of many external jumps in the text, and oh, that External link farm, WP:EL, WP:NOT. And WP:GTL, those commons links in See also.  And that see also!  :-) Gary, there is no average time, but I don't promote in less than five days and I archive as soon as there is consensus.  See WP:FAC/ar. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

No prob :-)  does thorough MoS reviews.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: Peer Review
I will do. SGGH speak! 15:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, good luck with it. You already have three FAs, maybe there is a unique barnstar I can find somewhere for you SGGH speak! 15:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Peer review of PHP
Hey, I'm looking for some criticism of PHP. I've posted a peer review of it at Peer review/PHP/archive1 so if you have a chance, please have a look and be as harsh as possible :) It's a B-level article right now but I'd really love to see it become an FA one day :D Thanks for all your help with my FA nominations! Gary King (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's taken some time, but I've finally responded to all of your comments. The article has also changed drastically since you last saw it, so if you have time, please look it over and post any new comments that you might have. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 18:57, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If you could move your comments to Peer review/PHP/archive2 I'd appreciate it, because I'd rather not want to load the entire Talk page to see the comments every time since it's so long now. Gary King (talk) 20:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The main issue with PHP is the lead, which I find a bit more difficult than most articles to create a summary because of all the technical things. I try to keep it as non-technical and easy to understand as possible. Also, a lot of the content on the page is very technical and was not added by me, so I continue to make judgement calls of whether or not to include information or if it's too difficult for most readers to comprehend or not very useful. Anyways, I've answered all of your concerns. I'll spend some time to go through the article a few more times over the next few days to find any more problems. I've also contacted a few people for copyediting requests. Gary King (talk) 21:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I find that writing about a technical topic is much more difficult than topics that are heavily based on events, such as companies or biographies, since those generally have a lot of news articles written about them. Well, I'm beginning to learn my way around writing FAs for different subjects I guess! Gary King (talk) 21:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Edmund Sheffield, 1st Baron Sheffield of Butterwick
Would you mind taking a look at Edmund Sheffield, 1st Baron Sheffield of Butterwick which someone has tagged as not meeting the general notability guideline. I believe there are a few other things I can add to improve it when I have a chance. In the mean time would it be too brazen to leave a message for that editor and remove the tag? Daytrivia (talk) 05:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the advise in dealing with the notability tag. I left message on the editors talk page with my intent. Thanks again. Daytrivia (talk) 19:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Forgot to say thanks for the work you have put into the article. Thank you. Daytrivia (talk) 19:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks
2 people helped with that question. Chubbennaitor (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV reports
Hi there! Thanks for fighting vandalism and helping us keep Wikipedia clean! Just dropping by to give a little tip. In your recent report, the IP you reported only edited once recently. Remember that IP addresses can be static or dynamic; if static, they may be shared by multiple people (for example, the nation of Qatar has 300,000 people using one IP address!), and if dynamic they may physically change computers every so often. This means that a lot of the time, IP vandals are not the same person, but rather different users using the address. Please account for this when reporting IPs. Thanks, and have a great day! Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! ☺  22:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't worry about it! :) Keep up the good work, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! ☺  22:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I have nominated List of autonomous areas by country as a WP:FLC
I have nominated List of autonomous areas by country as a WP:FLC and I would be happy if you could review it and comment on the nomination at Featured list candidates/List of autonomous areas by country. Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've responded to your concerns. Gary King (talk) 18:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you have time, could you please archive your comments that have been addressed at Featured list candidates/List of autonomous areas by country? Gary King (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Help
Hey, thanks man. That's exactly what I'm looking for! --  JT Holla! 23:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Just wanted to say thanks for the help. Beeblbrox (talk) 05:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Map creator?
Would you happen to know anyone who creates maps for Wikipedia? I am looking for someone to build a map for List of unrecognized countries. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 07:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

List of countries without armed forces is going to be an WP:FLC soon
If you have time, could you please take a look at List of countries without armed forces and tell me what you think I should improve? I'm going to be nominating it for a WP:FLC soon. Also, feel free to edit something if you think that your change will improve the article. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 02:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've nominated it at Featured list candidates/List of countries without armed forces. Please post your comments, thanks! Gary King (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Requesting peer review of List of unrecognized countries before listing as WP:FLC
Hi, I am requesting your time to peer review the List of unrecognized countries article. I would like to list it as a WP:FLC but feel that a peer review from you will help increase its chances of passing. Thanks for taking a look! Gary King (talk) 21:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Please post your comments at Peer review/List of unrecognized countries/archive1 and feel free to edit the article if you feel that certain things need to be modified and are fairly trivial. Gary King (talk) 21:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.
Thanks for fixing hte tagging on Hulk. Although initially passed, the article was failed by a later Admin, so I was trying to fix that, As you can see, I wasn't doing it right. I thank you. ThuranX (talk) 22:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Having seen the tagging now, I think i've set it right to reflect the fail, pass, admiin fail hsitory. Can you check that I've doen it right though? ThuranX (talk) 22:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I delisted it because it actually failed. See, I faked the passing, apparently. Admin David Fuchs failed it based on the second nom, which had previously passed. There was no third formal review, so I was trying to preserve the version dates and such to show that although one editor passed it, an admin pulled the pass and failed it. ThuranX (talk) 22:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright then. Doesn't particularly matter, as this situation is the impetus for me to leave the project. Thanks Peter, for your help with the template. ThuranX (talk) 22:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't understand why you're opposing David Fuchs' determination. Don't you understand that he doesn't need consensus to do this? Any editor can delist at any time, no review needed. David Fuchs chose that option. I'm simply abiding by policy and making things easy. I know you think you are helping, but by holding back David Fuchs, you hold back the article, and all of Wikipedia. Didn't you read that talk page?ThuranX (talk) 22:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

List of unrecognized countries has been nominated as a WP:FLC
I have just nominated List of unrecognized countries as a WP:FLC at Featured list candidates/List of unrecognized countries/archive1 and would appreciate it if you could vote in it, criticize it, and hopefully eventually fall in love with the article. Also, feel free to edit the article if you feel that a minor edit is needed. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 06:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Holstein
It would be better to rely on sources than on my memory; but I think you have combined two incompatible versions, which is not a correction. Do you have access to any history of nineteenth-century Europe?

My recollection, and Austro-Prussian war, say that what happened is that the peace treaty provided that the duchies would be ceded to Prince Christian, and they were duly taken away from Denmark, but the Prince never got them. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)